LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXflillSNI NVINOSHXIWS S:

<2 _ _ Z ; <f> Z w

s E S s

A 2 h #fA 2 /p^s^w;

> 'y ^ ^ > °
NoiinuiSNi NviNOSHiiiAis^sa i avaan librari es^smjthsonian “in

2 \ co -» co

CO

O .W -» U XOVos^X ~ o

2 ~J 2 “ «j 2

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IIAIS S
2 r" _ 2 p* z

H

CO

Z

m

CO — co __

NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IINS SaidVaail LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN IT

2 ^ CO 2 CO ^

/52Sm&\ - MX <

> ^

LIBRARI ES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOimillSNI^NVINOSHlNNS^S

<o ^ _ co ~ _ . CO

v LJ

s

oy " 5 5 ' w m

‘ NOlinillSNI ^NVINOSHimS^SB I avaan^LIBRAR I ES^ SMITHSONIAN^ If

l r~ 2 _ r* 2

> X^rrrr/Tx ““ ^ O

03
S3
>

S3

m '• V^V ^ X^VAbr^ m _

CO ' ~ CO ~ CO

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IINS S

CO 2 * CO 2

2 xC^tit^Nv < S <

H

X
O

| | v\y £.♦ " - i >

* NOlinillSNI ^NVINOSHlIINS^Sa I BVBa n^LIBRAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN IT

) _ ,. 2 \ m __ _ 5 CO

J CO V U! U) w

O - .w _ O X£yos*£X ~ O

2 -J 2 2

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IINS S
-- z r- _ 2 r~ . 2

.'V ••

co ‘ • - CO £ CO

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlIfUllSNI NVINOSHXIIAiS S
£ \ co — ^ z co z w

Z

. 5 ^ I ^ §-^*

°NOIirUIXSNI NVINOSHilWS^S 3 I a V a 8 II LIBRARIES 'SMITHSONIAN* It

0 Z \ CO "j» CO

iJ X^^OvX CO ^ ^ 1'n 1x5

o "7>F — O XOvos^iX ~ o

LIBRARI ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXnXlXSNJ^NVINOSHXIINS $

2 r- z

n ^ m

o ± co - — a>

NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IIAIS S3 I HVfci 9 ll_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
o 2 ™

co 3= co >y^

o

> 2 2 v\ >

2 LIBRARI ES^SMITHSONIAN"' INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVINOSHXIWS^S

“ CO ^ _ CO _ ~ . co

CO

o 2 *-#5r s

Z N0liniUSNIl'JNVIN0SHXIWSZS3 I ava 9 n'Tl B RAR I ESZSMITHSONIAN~l
z _ r~ z r- z £

A 33 3 /sw^wa » o flqfc 31

5s V ^«S&3SaL h~ -«3m J> I Li tw, ^H82l u» #A *F*

CO

3D

3D

m • \w 3; m

t: co ~ to ± co

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXflXlXSNI NVINOSHXIINS 5
z co _ z * co z co

X

1 X'W 9 W%/A^J E JVIW' 9
s | ■#* I* s

^NOlinillSNI NVINOSHIIWS S3 I avaailLIBRAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN I

CO ^ > CO _ _ ~ CO

z

mw;/c,

c

/

o X^osv^X Z O

z -J Z

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXfUIXSNI NV1 NOSHXI IAIS
: _ £ 'T £ r* _ . z

THE AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE
AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

EDITED BY

PHYLLIS BARCLAY-SMITH, M.B.E.

ASSISTED BY

Dr. C. J. 0. HARRISON

VOL, 76

JANUARY, 1970 to DECEMBER, 1970

Winchester
WARREN & SON Ltd.

1970

CONTENTS

Title-page ....... i

Contents ....... hi

List of Contributors ...... iv

List of Plates ....... ix

The Avicultural Society — Officers and Council, 1970 . 1

Officers of the Avicultural Society Past and Present . 2

Medallists of the Avicultural Society ... 3

Magazine ....... i

Index ........ 253

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

ARTICLES

Booth, Alan.

Birds at sea, 149.

Bunker, John.

Breeding the Ornate Lorikeet ( Trichoglossus ornatus), 241.

Callegari, E.

Breeding in captivity by a one-year-old Snowy Owl, 75.

Breeding in captivity of the European Bee-eater, the Carmine Bee-eater, and
of a hybrid between the two, 186.

Delacour, J.

The birds at Cleres in 1969, 24.

Brazilian bird collections, 71.

The Black-headed Bush Shrike ( Tchagra senegala ), 173.

Doughty, J.

Breeding the Stonechat, 1970 ( Saxicola torquata ), 227.

England, Derrick, see England, M. D.

England, M. D.

The Rufous-backed Shrike ( Lanius schach :), 61.

‘ Escapes ’, 150.

Farrant, Paul.

Breeding Mitchell’s Lorikeet, 26.

Flieg, G. Michael.

Observations on the first North American breeding of the Spot-winged Wood
Quail ( Odontophorus capueira), 1.

Breeding the Yellow-wattled Brush Turkey in North America, 161.

Frauca, Harry.

The Australian Penguin ( Eudyptula minor), 21.

Australian Parrots: Problems and studies, 155.

Goodwin, Derek.

On the Little Bee-eater, 137.

Hall, A. E.

Breeding the Black-necked Starling ( Sturnus nigricollis ), 6.

Hanover, Donald G.

A dilute form of the Key-west Quail Dove, 66.

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

V

Harrap, K. S.

Breeding of the Lark-like Bunting, 4.

Harrison, C. J. O.

Helpers at the nest in the Purple Gallinule ( Porphyrio porphyria), 2.
Subspecies and aviculture: some notes of recent difficulties, 191.

The identification of the Kansu Babbler and Grey-headed Babbler, 194.

“ White-capped ” American Parrots, 252.

Henry, D. M. Reid-, see Reid-Henry, D. M.

Hodges, J. R.

The Blue-winged Grass Parrakeet ( Neophema chrysostoma ), 47.

Holyoak, David T.

Observations on the behaviour of a pair of Green Broadbills ( Calyptomena
viridis), 16.

The behaviour of captive Purple Gallinules {Porphyrio porphyrio ), 98.

Holyoak, D. T., and Sager, Deidre.

Observations on captive Tasmanian Native Hens and their interactions with
wild moorhens, 56.

Isenberg, A. H.

Breeding the Rufous Laughing Thrush {Garrulax caerulatus ), 143.

Johnstone, S. T.

Keeping and breeding Flamingoes at Slimbridge, 18.

Waterfowl eggs, 52.

Jones, Marvin L.

Some birds in South-east Australian zoos, 27.

Klos, Heinz- Georg.

Berlin Zoo news, 204.

Lambert, R. Unwin.

Notes on the breeding and behaviour of Japanese Quails {Coturnix japonicd),
177.

Leitch, Leila.

Breeding Black-crested Finches or Pigmy Cardinals {Lophospingus pusillus ),
174*

Lendon, Alan.

The breeding of the Corella (Long-billed or Slender-billed Cockatoo ( Cacutua
( Licmetis ) tenuirostris), 236.

Low, Rosemary.

The Red-capped Parrot {Pionopsitta pileata ), 96.

The Massena’s Parrot, 153.

VI

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Mallet, John.

Hand-rearing and keeping baby Swallows, 148.

Meaden, F.

Notes on breeding the Common Whitethroat, Nuthatch, Willow Warbler and
Waxwing, 9.

Breeding Robins, 158.

Murray, H.

Breeding the Fawn-naped Tanager, 243.

Nakata, Yukio.

An expedition to Alaska in search of Grouse and Ptarmigan and on the way
back a visit to the western district of America, 195.

N 0RGAARD- OLESEN, E.

Breeding the Fire-fronted Bishop ( Euplectes diademata ), 94.

Norris, K. A.

Some aviary notes, 1970, 245.

Olesen, E. Norgaard-, see N orcaard - Olesen , E.
Olney, P. J. S.

London Zoo notes, 205.

Prestwick, Arthur A.

Allen Silver — Obituary, 34.

News and views, 35, 76, 132, 164, 206, 248.
Council Meeting, 13 1, 247.

British Aviculturists’ Club, 132, 163, 248.
Extinct, vanishing and hypothetical parrots, 198.

Reid-Henry, D. M.

The Natal Pygmy Kingfisher ( Ispidina picta), 89.
* Mr. Barnes-Wingdove ’ — An obituary, 213.

Restall, Robin L.

The Elegant Bunting ( Eviberiza elegans ), 41.

Rhodes, Brenda.

Breeding the Black-tailed Conure ( Pyrrhura melanura ), 141.

Roles, Grenville.

Breeding the Grey Touraco at the Jersey Zoological Park ( Corythaixoides
concolor concolor ), 232.

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

VII

Roots, Clive.

The ‘ Winged World ’ in 1969, 114.

Breeding the Little Bee-eater at the Winged World ( Merops pusillus), 139.
Breeding the Southern Tree Pie at the Winged World, 144.

Breeding the Brown-throated Barbet at the Winged World, 145.

Breeding the Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeon at the Winged World, 146.
Breeding the Blue-crowned Motmot at the Winged World ( Momotus momota),

188.

Breeding the Thailand Hoopoe at the Winged World ( Upupa epops longirostris),

189.

Sager, Deidre, see Holyoak, D. T.

SCAMELL, K. M.

Breeding the Lemon-rumped Tanager ( Ramphocelus icteronotus), 216.

Smith, Clifford.

Breeding the Double Yellow-headed Amazon (. Amazona ochrocephala oratrix),
234-

Breeding the Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, 238.

Smith, G. A.

Notes on a pair of Long-tailed Parrakeets ( Psittacula longicaudata), 179.

Smyth, H.

Hand-rearing and observing Birds of Paradise, 67.

Spilsbury, D. T.

Rothschild’s Mynah ( Leucopsar rothschildi) — Register and report on 1969
census, 115.

SWAENEPOL, L. A.

Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets ( Psittacula krameri manillensis ), 92.

Thomson, T. S.

Nylon netting, 58.

Instant planted aviaries, no.

Trollope, Jeffrey.

Behaviour notes on the Barred and Andalusian Hemipodes {Turnix suscitator
and Turnix sylvatica ), 219.

Walsh, J. J.

Breeding the African Song Sparrow and Green Singing Finch in Australia,
147.

Wayne, Philip.

Breeding results in the Norfolk Wildlife Park, 129.

Breeding the Alpine Chough at the Norfolk Wildlife Park ( Pyrrhocax g.
gracuius)y 230.

Breeding the Azure-winged Magpie at the Norfolk Wildlife Park ( Cyanopica
cyanus cooki ), 240.

Breeding season 1970 at the Norfolk Wildlife Park, 244.

VIII

NOTES, CORRESPONDENCE, AND CORRIGENDUM

The adventures of an escaped Red-billed Blue Magpie, K. A. Norris,
p. 38; Vitamins and French moult, R. W. Phipps, p. 38; Releasing birds
at liberty or semi-liberty, Robin L. Restall, p. 39; Longevity in parrots,
Kenneth C. Parkes, p. 40; E. B. Tanner, p. 40; Meat and protein food
for parrots, C. J. O. Harrison, p. 84; G. A. Smith, p. 84; E. Wicks, p. 85;
Herbert Murray, p. 85; Notes on Parrakeets and Seedeaters, Peter
Paris, p. 168; Rare and vanishing Amazona parrots, A. A. Prestwich,
p. 169; Feeding parrots, S. B. Kendall, p. 170; Tool-using by birds,
G. A. Smith, p. 171 ; Aviculturists, Ray C. Erickson, p. 172; Cockatiels — -
their versatility as foster parents, D. G. Marriott, p. 212; Corrigendum:
Indian Ringnecked Parrots — the colours of variant birds, p. 212,

LIST OF PLATES

#Spot-winged Wood Quail .....

facing page

I

Andean Flamingo with chick ....

>»

l8

Fairy Penguin and chick in burrow

>>

22

Fairy Penguins returning to the nest, Phillips Island,
Victoria ........

>>

23

^Elegant Bunting .......

a

41

Juvenile Rufous-backed Shrike Lanius schach , '
28 days old. Note deformed feet and general
retarded development .....

' a

62

Juvenile Rufus-backed Shrike Lanius schach ,
53 days old. Note hind toes . . . . .

Normal Key- west Quail Dove ...

Dilute variety of the Key-west Quail Dove

a

66

Playground of Lawes’ Six-plumed Bird of Paradise ")

Immature Blue Bird of Paradise .

a

67

#Natal Pygmy Kingfisher .....

a

89

*Little Bee-eater .......

a

i37

Massena’s Parrot ......

a

*54

Black Cockatoo .......

a

155

#Black-headed Bush Shrike Tchagra senegala .

a

*73

Artificial nest-site for Bee-eaters ....

a

186

Young Blue-crowned Motmot, two days after leaving
the nest-tunnel at the Winged World .

a

188

Willow-Ptarmigan at Mrs. Kubek’s Farm

if

196

^Bronze-winged Dove ......

if

213

Grey Touraco ( Corythaixoides concolor concolor)
Parent bird .......

a

232

Grey Touraco, 13 days old. Born 31 May, 1970 .

a

233

Slender-billed Cockatoo .....

a

236

Young Stone Curlew chick ....

a

244

Two young Stone Curlews .....

a

245

^Denotes a coloured plate.

s'n.xos'^

^ uf

iiiR'Pi

/A <,*>3

AVICULTURAL

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 1
JANUARY-FEBRUARY
1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

PAGE

Observations on the first North American Breeding of the Spot-winged
Wood Quail ( Odontophorus capueira ), (with coloured plate), by
G. Michael Flieg . i

Helpers at the Nest in the Purple Gallinule ( Porphyrio porphyrio ), by

C. J. O. Harrison 2

Breeding of the Lark-like Bunting, by K. S. Harrap .... 4

Breeding the Black-necked Starling ( Sturnus nigricollis ) by A. E. Hall 6

Notes on Breeding the Common White-throat, Nuthatch, Willow Warbler

and Waxwing, by F. Meaden ........ 9

Observations on the Behaviour of a pair of Green Broadbills (Calyptomena

viridis), by David Holyoak . 16

Keeping and Breeding Flamingos at Slimbridge (with plate), by

S. T. Johnstone . 18

The Australian Penguin ( Eudyptula minor) (with plates), by Harry Frauca 21

The Birds at Cleres in 1969, by J. Delacour ..... 24

Breeding Mitchell’s Lorikeet, by Paul Farrant ..... 26

Some Birds in South-east Australian Zoos, by Marvin L. Jones . . 27

Obituary ........... 34

News and Views .......... 35

Notes ............ 38

Correspondence .......... 38

the avicultural society

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, M.B.E., 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.
Assistant Editor: C. J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

Avicult. Mag.

Spot-winged Wood Quail

[J. P. O’Neill

W J

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 76. — No. 1. — All rights reserved. JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1970

OBSERVATIONS ON THE FIRST NORTH
AMERICAN BREEDING OF THE SPOT-WINGED
WOOD QUAIL

{Odontophorus capueira)

By G. Michael Flieg (St. Louis Zoological Park, Missouri, U.S.A.).

The Spot- Winged Wood Quail, also known as the Capueiria Partridge
or Uru, is a small stocky game-bird found on the ground in the dense
tropical forest of eastern Brazil, Paraguay and northeastern Argentina.
It is very beautiful, but not gaudy. The ventral parts are lead grey,
the back is spotted brown and black, and there is red bare skin around
the eyes. It has cinnamon eyebrows and a dark spot behind the eye.

The overall size is just a bit larger than that of the Bob White ( Colinus
virginianus). This species was fed on game bird crumbles and trout chow.
It was kept in a heated barn when the weather dropped to less than 45 0 F.
These birds are kept in the barn normally from November through March
and have free choice at other times barring very inclement weather.

In April 1965 three Spot- Winged Wood Quail began to build a nest in
their cage at the St. Louis Zoo. They were housed with Cinereus
Tinamou ( Nothoprocta cinereus) in a pheasant aviary 7x3m. Although
the sexes were undetermined, we have since found out that two males and
one female were involved in nest building. They gathered nesting material
by picking it up and throwing it over their shoulders to the next
bird in the line, finally transporting it to the nest site. The unique nest
of the genus Odontophorus is domed and about 40 x 50 cm. in size and
is similar to the nests of many neotropical passerines. The domed
nest took about three days to complete, and five white, size 40 x 28 mm.
eggs were laid at daily intervals. These were removed and a second
clutch of three eggs was laid about two weeks later. Three eggs hatched
on 14th May 1965 after an incubation period of 26-27 days, although one
pipped 10th May 1965, four days prior to hatching. The newly hatched
young looked very much like Bob White, ( Colinus virginianus ), but were
a bit larger with blood red beaks and dark legs.

Although they grew very quickly at first, when they reached about
half the size of the adult they slowed down and did not reach full size
until about two months old.

A

2 C. J. O. HARRISON — HELPERS AT THE NEST IN THE PURPLE GALLINULE

At this age they still had not developed contour feathers on the back and
rump. At the age of three and a half months they could be detected
from the adults only by darker colouration and grey cheeks.

This breeding by the St. Louis Zoological Garden was cited as a first
in North America by the American Game Bird Breeders Cooperative
Federation. We would surely like to know if it could be a first captive
world breeding and would appreciate hearing to the contrary.

* * *

HELPERS AT THE NEST IN THE PURPLE
GALLINULE

(Porphyrio porphyrio )

By C. J. O. Harrison (Perivale, Middlesex, England)

It is well known that the young of the first brood of the Moorhen,
Gallinula chloropus , in each year will help to feed the young of the second
brood, often taking food from the parents and passing it on to the younger
chicks; but such sociability ceases at the end of the season. Ridpath
(1964) found that the large flightless rail, the Tasmanian Native Hen,
Tribonyx mortierii , might form groups of three or four birds instead of
pairs, and that such groups, which remained together persistently,
consisted of several males with one female. This social behaviour does
not, however, appear to have been more widely noted in the rail family,
but as in the case of the Purple Gallinule, P. porphyrio , this may be due
to the fact that behaviour which becomes apparent in an open aviary is
very difficult to observe with much more timid birds in the depths of a
swamp or reedbed.

The Snowdon Aviary of the London Zoo houses, among other species,
some individuals of the pale-headed Indian race of the Purple Gallinule,
P. porphyrio poliocephalus (this is the Old World species, not the North
American Purple Gallinule, Porphyrula martinicd). The birds of this
race are a light purplish blue with a paler, whitish head, and the usual
white under tail coverts and red bill and legs. They have bred in this
aviary for several successive seasons. On a visit during July 1968 I
noticed two adults with three half-sized young in blackish down with
smooth foreheads. A third adult was collecting a bill full of grass and
leaves which looked like nest material. It walked towards the other two,
one of which joined it, followed by two of the chicks. The third bird
dropped the material it was holding and these two adults and young went
to a food tray where the adults fed the young. Even at this stage one of
the young tried to emulate adults by holding food up in one foot and
balancing on the other, although not with complete success. The other
adult and other young one remained at the nest-site. As far as I was aware
the adults should have been a pair and the young of a previous year.

C. J. O. HARRISON — HELPERS AT THE NEST IN THE PURPLE GALLINULE 3

Next year, at the end of August 1969, I made further observations.
The aviary appeared to have seven apparently adult birds. There was
one group of four which moved around the lower part of it, near the canal.
There were another two which kept together and did not normally approach
to within more than nine or ten feet of the others, but would occasionally
pass more closely when moving from one part to another or to food trays,
and appeared to share some of the area. One odd bird was alone in an
upper corner of the aviary. It was not possible to distinguish any
obviously immature birds among these. F rom my observations it appeared
that the group of four constituted a social unit, but there was no sign of
any interaction with the other two birds nearby, nor was it possible to
assign any particular role to any one of the four, as the following notes
indicate.

I had previously seen three of the four squatting close together, one
apparently on a nest, near the S.W. corner of the aviary. Two were now
resting with bodies pressed together on a more central site near the main
pool and among growing plants, no. 1 just resting, no. 2 with a wing held
a little apart from the body, the pale bill and dark head of a chick just
visible under the wing. No. 2 broke off small pieces of surrounding
plants and fed them to the chick. No. 3 stood near no. 2 and also fed
the chicks at intervals. From subsequent brief views at least three chicks
were present. Occasionally no. 3 passed food items to no. 2 who gave them
to the chicks. No. 4 appeared carrying a piece of food and broke off
pieces which it passed to no, 3 who fed the chicks directly or passed it to
no. 2 for them. No. 4 moved off, returned with more food and this time
stood near no. 3 and passed the food directly to no. 2 who fed the chicks
with it. After a pause, no. 4 thrust its head and neck under no. 2, forced
its way under and pushed no. 2 off the chicks, taking over the brooding.

No. 2 now left the nest and walked to where no, 3 was breaking up a
large piece of food held down in its foot. No 3 then began passing
small pieces of food to no. 2. Some of these were eaten, but in several
instances a small piece of food was passed backwards and forwards a
number of times before finally being eaten by one or the other. The piece
of food would be held in the bill by one bird, and taken from the bill by
the other bird. Later I noticed that when young were being fed, if a
piece of food proved too large for them to swallow, the adult would
repeatedly take it back from the bill of the young one and then offer it
again; and if two adults were present they might repeatedly take it from
each other’s bill before passing it back to the chick. The repeated taking
of the fragment from another bird’s bill appears to result in the food
being broken into successively smaller pieces ; and I think that this passing
back and forth, and retrieving from the bill of the chick, is behaviour
which results in portions too large to swallow being broken down to a
convenient size for eating. The passing of small morsels between the
two adults in the instance above probably arose from the fact that their
feeding was associated with the presence of young birds.

4

K. S. HARRAP — BREEDING OF THE LARK-LIKE BUNTING

After a break in observation I returned later to find one bird brooding
the young while the others were scattered, odd individuals bringing food
at intervals. Towards the end of the afternoon two of the four birds were
seen collecting bills full of leaves and grass, apparently nest material, and
passing this to the bird brooding the chicks who built the material up
around itself as a nest, probably a temporary structure on which to brood
the young.

REFERENCE

Ridpath, M. G. 1964. The Tasmanian Native Hen. Australian Natural History
14 : 346-350.

# * #

BREEDING OF THE LARK-LIKE BUNTING

By K. S. Harrap (West Somerton, Bellevue, Bulawayo, Rhodesia)

Lark-like Buntings, Fringillaria impetuani , are a pale edition of the
well-known Cinnamon Rock Bunting, Fringillaria tahapisi , their size
being about that of the European Linnet.

Description

Male , Adult.

Head. Crown and nape, buffy brown, finely streaked olive-brown.
Upper parts. Mainly buffy-brown with streaking on mantle.

Under parts. Throat, pinkish buff; breast, tawny olive changing to
dark buff on belly; under wing coverts and axillaries, pinkish buff.
Tail. Olive-brown.

Bill. Upper Mandible, slate; lower mandible, flesh colour.

Female , Adult.

Resembles male, perhaps lighter on wings.

Juvenile.

As adult.

This bird is very nomadic in habit and will invade an area, stay for
several months then completely disappear, especially here in Rhodesia.
A bird of dry country, it seems to favour Matabeleland which is in the
southern part of the country. One of these invasions was in 1962 and
several were trapped by local aviculturists. My pair were two of these
and, as they showed no signs of breeding over the years, were classified
as two of a sex. The birds came into my possession in 1968 and were put
in an aviary 20 ft. x 16 ft. with Rock Buntings, Golden Breasted Buntings,
Finch Larks, Quail Finches, Waxbills of several species, and Doves as
companions.

K. S. HARRAP — BREEDING OF THE LARK-LIKE BUNTING

5

The two birds completely ignored one another until August of 1969
when one was seen singing lustily from a rock in the aviary, stopping only
to chase the other round the aviary with drooped wings, not unlike the
courtship of the domestic canary. A week or so later I missed the female
and on searching through the aviary I found her sitting on two brown
speckled eggs in a little nest made at the base of a large clump of bamboo.
The composition of the nest was mainly coarse grass bents and small
broken twigs, the lining consisted mainly of the fine down from Pampas
Grasses and Hessian taken from an old sack which had been placed in the
aviary to attract white ants (termites).

Both eggs hatched after being incubated by the female only for about
twelve days. The chicks were covered in a long white down but un¬
fortunately I could not see the skin colour as the hen sat very close. Pin
feathers were observed growing on the young at a week old and both left
the nest at fourteen days, their tails being half grown.

Feeding

Both birds assisted in feeding the young and became very tame,
waiting for me to put in their daily feed of termites. The male would go
to the nest and feed the brooding female who in turn passed on the ants
to the young. Later as the young grew both adults would fill up with
ants then regurgitate them to the young. I do not think that the parents
fed seed to the chicks until they were about nine days old. As the aviary
is a planted one I should say that the old birds caught a lot of live food for
themselves. Mixed seed and grit was given as the staple diet, also cattle
lick (rock salt) of which all the birds are very fond.

The young birds are now self-supporting and the female is already
incubating two more eggs in a new nest not far from the old one.

6

A. E. HALL — BREEDING THE BLACK-NECKED STARLING

BREEDING THE BLACK-NECKED STARLING

(Sturnus nigricollis) j

By A. E. Hall (Lower Haselor, Evesham, Worcestershire, England)

This species is resident throughout Burma generally, across to southern
China and is probably more widespread than this but little seems to have
been published about this bird. A hand-reared pair was sent to Mr.
W. R. Partridge in March 1967 from Hong Kong by Dr. K. C. Searle.

The length of the birds is 11 inches. The bill is black, iris pale buff-
white and the legs and feet are pale bluish pink. The elliptical shaped
area of bare skin around the eye is yellowish in the adult male and bluish
in the adult female. The head, breast, rump and underparts are white,
the neck and back is black. A narrow band of white runs across the base
of the hind neck and joins up on each side with the white on the breast
giving the bird a completely separate black collar. The wings are black
with a patch of white flecks on the shoulder, the thumb (false wing or
bastard wing) is white with a broken white line running from that point
across the tips of the median wing coverts and the secondaries are also
tipped with white. The tail is black tipped with a narrow band of white.
The white rump is only seen in flight.

For a few weeks after arrival they were housed in a large cage in the
bird-room and settled down quickly even though their diet was changed
slightly. Fruit, in the form of apple and orange with the occasional piece
of banana and a few grapes, was taken readily and mealworms were
relished. Coarse insectile food and raw minced meat soon formed an
equal part of the diet to the fruit as the quantity of mealworms was
reduced. Maggots were left and only eaten when other more desirable
foods were finished. As the birds settled down, fruit was reduced to
just soft, sweet apple.

When all signs of hard frost had gone and spring was set in its ways the
birds were moved to a planted aviary measuring 22 ft. x 8 ft. with an
adjoining shelter of 10 ft. x 8 ft. Since we knew little about the breeding
habits of these birds they were furnished with a hollow log hung about
7 ft. from the ground as well as there being many possible nest sites in
the bushes. In the summer of 1967 they chose a site on top of the nest-
log and began building a large untidy nest, mostly of dead grasses from
the aviary floor and hay which was supplied to them. Eggs were laid,
incubated, and hatched but the chicks were lost in the early stages of
rearing. The birds remained in the aviary throughout the winter and
in the summer of 1968 began to build once again. This time they chose
a site on a wire platform in the corner of the aviary and everything went
well until the chicks were about a fortnight old when unfortunately they
were lost once again.

A. E. HALL — BREEDING THE BLACK-NECKED STARLING

7

In 1969 they seemed to start in a haphazard manner, carrying nesting
material to many possible sites, then quite suddenly after two weeks of
this undecidedness they chose an entirely new site about 6 ft. from the
ground in an elder bush, and had completed the nest in three days.
On the 23rd May I noticed during feeding that only the cock was visible
and this continued until 28th May when the hen appeared. The nest
contained five eggs and this was the only time that I saw the hen off the
nest during incubation. The first sign of anything happening came on
10th June when I saw the shell of a hatched egg on the ground. Maggots
were fed ad-lib. and on 12th June another shell appeared plus the sounds
of chicks in the nest. The consumption of maggots began rising and
after the first few days a small quantity of mealworms were supplied also.
The amount of live-food being utilized by the birds reached a peak of
one and a half pints of maggots and a handful of mealworms daily on
22nd June, then remained constant for five days before starting to reduce.
Nest inspection on 28th June revealed only one chick, quite well feathered,
and the remains of a chick which must have died a few days earlier. The
parent birds were living almost entirely on live food themselves because
the amount of minced meat and apple being taken was negligible. On
1 st July the chick was sitting on the edge of the nest entrance and two
days later it had left the nest completely and was hopping about on the
ground and lower branches of the bushes. After seeing the chick out
in the open I realized that its legs were twisted and splayed as if due to
calcium deficiency. This chick died a few days later and the parents
very quickly began building again but due to the overgrown state of the
bushes I did not know where.

Again the hen was lost from view and on 30th July, after seeing both
birds out in the open, I inspected the old nest to find that it had been
renovated and contained partly incubated eggs. An empty shell appeared
on 4th August and again maggots were fed ad-lib., but this time with
additions to try to overcome the deficiencies of the chick which was lost
earlier. To one pint of maggots I added one teaspoon of “ Stress ”
calcium and phosphorous powder, one teaspoon of Gevral protein food
and one c.c. of “Abidec ” multi-vitamin. The birds took to this quite
readily and an ad-lib. supply continued until consumption reached one
pint daily then they were restricted to this amount. Minced meat was
increased to meet the demand and a few mealworms, pupae and beetles
were given also. On 22nd August a few maggots were left over from the
day before, previous to this everything had been eaten and food-pots were
strewn everywhere in the search for live food. Three days later a chick
was sitting on a branch just outside the nest and over the next few days
it ventured further afield. This youngster appeared quite strong and
showed no signs of any outward deformities, then on 29th August it was
found dead. For the first time I saw two more chicks in the seclusion
of the elder bush so every attempt had to be made to save them.

8

A. E. HALL — BREEDING THE BLACK-NECKED STARLING

A quick post-mortem revealed that suffocation due to gape worms could
have been the cause of death, everything else appearing to be normal and
the bird in excellent condition bodily. “ Thibenzole ” powder was
mixed into a solution with water following instructions on the packet and
given at the rate of i c.c. per lb. body weight. The dead chick weighed
4 ozs. and I estimated each parent to be about 6 ozs., then put i J c.c. of
the solution on the maggots, rather than risk possible losses from catching
to give direct dosage to each bird. This treatment was omitted for a day
then given again the following day and once a week thereafter as a
precaution.

The juvenile plumage is greyish fawn and brownish black with rather
indistinct borders between the two colours. Adult plumage is attained
in the first moult.

After the chicks had been out of the nest for three weeks I had to
transfer them to another aviary because the adult hen was driving them
around in an unsociable manner. The youngsters, now on their own,
feed entirely on raw minced meat, leaving the maggots, both with and
without the additives mentioned earlier, untouched. By the end of
October they had completed their first moult and now look exactly like
their parents.

The adult birds made another attempt at breeding after the youngsters
had been removed but gave up after two eggs had been laid. I examined
the nest and found it approximately 18 in. in diameter and of the cross
section shown. The egg measurements were i J in. x J in. and of a light
turquoise blue colour.

As described above A. E. Hall has bred the Black-necked Starling
Sturnus nigricollis. It is believed that this may be a first success. Any
member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species in Great
Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once with the
Hon. Secretary.

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

9

NOTES ON BREEDING THE COMMON WHITE-
THROAT, NUTHATCH, WILLOW WARBLER
AND WAXWING

By F. Meaden (Cheshunt, Hertfordshire, England)

I have, for many years, been keeping birds of British and European
species, trying to discover the conditions and diet which will keep them
in good health in aviaries and induce them to breed. The birds described
here were kept in a suburban garden at Slough, where the aviaries, at
first at the bottom of the garden, gradually spread over a large part of it.
In order to check what was happening I kept a record of the various
nestings on large cards which could be filed to form a permanent record.
The following account gives details of some of the breeding achieved.
Since it is difficult to discover with certainty which of these species have,
or have not, been bred in aviaries I had not attached very great importance
to these, with the possible exception of the Waxwings; but the Assistant
Editor informs me that there appear to be no adequate published records
of the breeding of these particular species, and has asked me to prepare
these notes on them.

COMMON WHITETHROATS

A pair of Common Whitethroats, Sylvia communis , after spending the
winter of 1953 in an unheated birdroom were, in early April 1954, given
the freedom of an 8 ft. x 3 ft. x 7 ft. outdoor aviary built alongside the
garden fence on what had previously been a flowei bed. The roof,
although of wire, was almost covered by polythene sheet, the rear along
one of the 8 ft. sides was overgrown with hops, and one end was shut off
completely by a dense lilac bush, which also sent up a host of shoots
through the earth of the aviary floor. The end portion where the lilac
branches encroached into the enclosure was packed with gorse to a height
of about two or three feet and this, with a blackberry bush growing in its
midst, the lilac and hops all contributed to provide quite a dense growth.
The remainder of the enclosure was fairly clear except for a turf or two of
grass, a small wood ants’ nest and the birds’ bathing facilities. On
14th April the birds were seen carrying some small white feathers into
the gorse. After throwing down a few mealworms at the opposite end
of their aviary to keep the birds occupied, we removed a ply- wood sheet
which hid an observation hole into the bush. We found that a nest was
almost completed. When we provided a wad of dog hair they showed
no further interest in feathers and lined the nest fully with the latter
material. On 17th April the first egg appeared and four more were laid
on consecutive days. Three young had hatched by 5th May and we
noticed a sudden change in the parent birds’ food consumption; little
fruit was now taken but the Farex and maggot intake was doubled, and

IO

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

mealworms were cleared from the dish directly they were given. Whether
ants were taken I do not know, there were however no eggs at that time.
The hops which covered the side of this aviary were absolutely smothered
with greenfly, the back of each leaf being thick with them. These too
must have formed a large part of the nestlings’ diet because the parents
were often seen working the vine-like stems. The pear so avidly taken
prior to rearing was left almost untouched but by 25th May the soft pulp
of the fruit was once again taken and only the hollowed-out skin remaining.
Previous to 28th May only two young had been seen moving around the
aviary, but on that day we observed three and the two adults. One
youngster seemed very large but two were far smaller. Even so all were
seen to be taking grated cheese, Farex, pear, grated carrot, maggots,
greenfly and even the soft food and mealworms. The old hen died
suddenly on 7th June. She appeared perfectly fit in the morning but was
dead at 6.30 p.m. The young and the adult male were all in excellent
condition. The young were now also taking soaked household currants,
a favourite with many warblers. With Autumn the four remaining birds
fed almost exclusively on ripe elderberries. The amount of weight which
was now put on was amazing and there was now little if any disparity in
size or weight of any of the birds.

NUTHATCHES

A pair of Nuthatches, Sitta europaea , were given me by a friend in the
autumn of 1954. They were overwintered in a large aviary with a number
of other species, but made themselves a nuisance by stealing the sunflower
seeds intended for the finches, however great the quantity, and concealing
them in crevices and in the ground at the foot of wooden supports. They
were therefore moved to another aviary, an all-wire structure of irregular
shape, about 9 ft. x 6 ft., which they shared with a pair of Reed Buntings
Emberiza schoeniclus. A major part of the aviary was occupied by a
pond 6 ft. x 3 ft. with a lot of water iris. The aviary was built around the
trunk of an old, 30-foot apple tree, the enclosed part of the trunk being
covered with honeysuckle and having a “ V ” shaped fork into which a
nest-box was secured. The box was of a horizontal type, made of wood
and covered with bark, and with one side fitted so that it could be removed.
Maggots, mealworms, grated cheese, beetles, earwigs, a marrow bone, suet,
soaked sunflower seed and Avi-vite soft food was the standard diet, and
in addition either the Reed Buntings or Nuthatches were taking tadpoles
and small frogs from the pond, for on a ledge of the aviary were the remains
of dozens of these creatures.

During the season the Reed Buntings tried to nest, building low in a
gorse bush, but the Nuthatches destroyed four nests of eggs, which I took
to be sheer vandalism on their part. Friends had visited us one Sunday
in June 1955, one intending to take some photographs of the birds, the
other merely to see the collection. We were all relaxing in the sun when

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

II

one called out, “ Do you know your Nuthatches are feeding young? ”
My immediate thought was that, as was their customary habit, these birds
were carrying up and hiding food. However, when I investigated the
box to prove that he was wrong I found four strong youngsters with
feathers just breaking through. The parents continued to rear them on
the diet provided without difficulty.

In the autumn bickering between the birds had commened in earnest
and since space was short we decided that the Nuthatches had to go.
We had at that time a flat near Kensington Gardens and thought that this
would be an ideal spot. We housed the birds separately for the winter,
having sexed them as three definite pairs, and in April 1956 we liberated
the old pair and one of the young pairs. They were released very close
to Bays water Road, nearly opposite Lancaster Gate Church. An interval
of 25 minutes was allowed between releasing the pairs, and in each case
they remained within a few feet of each other, climbing the trees as though
they had known the place for years. We chose this area mainly for
sentimental reasons, having spent many leisure hours watching the park’s
birds. The releasing of these birds had a rather unexpected conclusion.
In the London Evening News there appeared later a report entitled
“ Rare birds back in Royal Park after 50 years ” and referring to the
nuthatches. We notified organizations which would be interested of the
part we had played in this new sighting. This resulted in correspondence
between the Nature Conservancy and ourselves, clearing up the matter.
However, it is nice to know that the birds did breed at a later date.

WILLOW WARBLERS

An adult pair of Willow Warblers, Phylloscopus trochilus , were given
me in the autumn of 1959 by an old friend, Mr. R. C. Tout. I kept them
over winter in an unheated birdroom and put them out in spring into
one of the aviaries along the side of the garden. This structure was
8 ft. x 7 ft. x 3 ft. The rear was covered by hops and convolvolus, at one
end a wisteria completely hid 2 ft. of the structure, while at the other end
and over a fair amount of the aviary front was a well-grown grape-vine.
Inside the aviary grew Everlasting Pea.

With all this cover observation was not easy, but on 3rd June i960 we
noticed that there were more birds in their enclosure than there should
have been. After watching for the best part of an hour we found that
at least three young were being fed by the old pair. Further examination
of the aviary from the inside revealed a nest low down in an old dead fir
which was overgrown with convolvulus. The adult pair, normally so
tame, were now behaving like mad things, calling frantically and keeping
as far as possible from me. One youngster had joined them and the other
two went to ground. For fear of treading on them I had to retieat from
their enclosure.

12

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

The fouled and used nest was composed of grasses, honeysuckle skin
from branches growing in the aviary, what appeared to be old leaves of
iris, and the lining was of hair and feathers. They must have worked
really hard to gather all these items, for I had provided no nest material,
being under the impression that both had sung and that they were two
birds of the same sex. Two young were of the same size as the parents
but the third was a weakling. From the nest I recovered the body of a
fourth chick so dried into the hair and feathers that no age could be
assessed from the remains. From this data it would seem that they must
have nested about the first week in May.

In the enclosure was a nest of wood ants acquired from a nearby
beechwood and a bamboo cane pushed through the wire netting, inserted
into the anthill, and moved from side to side, uncovered many pupae
daily. They were small but were avidly taken. It was noticed that if
an ant got onto a bird’s leg the bird would peck at it in fear and fly off.
All the climbing plant growth within the aviary produced much greenfly
and a profusion of mixed insect life. We saw the adults feeding the young
on greenfly, but since the maggot dish was emptied more quickly than
usual I imagine that these too were being taken for them. What had
first caught our notice was the male actually regurgitating a sort of white
liquid. It was probably only Farex but the regurgitation surprised me.
The food prior to the young being observed had been grated cheese,
Avi-vite softfood, wax-moth larvae (normally only given at week-ends
when time permitted), ripe pear, fruit fly which they took on the wing or
from a bucket containing over-ripe fruit, and Farex to which we added
calcium phosphate during the breeding season. Our only addition now
was a handful of mealworms in a dish at their late afternoon feed, together
with increased quantities of the other foods.

According to my record card, on 6th June all the young were thriving
and searching for insects through the aviary vegetation. One male was
rather bare about the head, and the adult male was seen to attack it when
it ventured close to him or the female, whether because it was a male or
because of its begging for food I do not know. The runt of the three had
now improved, and although still a shade smaller in size was as strong on
the leg and wing as the others. A number of people saw the young, but
none were more surprised than I by the successful rearing of them.
Had I even suspected that they were a true pair at the start, or that some
attempt to nest and breed was being made, I would certainly have gone
to a lot of trouble to assist; but I feel certain that the abundant supply of
greenfly weighed the balance in their favour.

WAXWINGS

I had kept a number of Waxwings, Bomhycilla garrulus , for some years,
but although I had successful hatchings in previous years it was not until
1962 that the young were actually reared. I published some notes on

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

*3

breeding these birds in the magazine (Meaden 1964) but did not give the
actual nesting account. The flock of a dozen or so birds was kept in a
fairly large aviary with overall dimensions about 30 ft. x 14 ft. x 7 ft.
They were sociable birds and even in the breeding season would rest
within inches of each other, the males showing no territorial aggression
even when nesting unless an interloper actually alighted at the nest, when
the reaction was limited to a forward threat with widely gaping mouth.
The flock was not made up of equal pairs. Females predominated in a
ratio of about two to one. The breeding displays have been described
elsewhere (Meaden 1964; Meaden and Harrison 1965).

It was in June that our birds started nesting. As usual dried chickweed
and grasses formed the basis of the nest, some birds using home-made
nest-baskets, others using natural twigs. All the nests were lined with
animal hair or fur, and with vegetable down from seed-heads. There
were at one time seven nests in use, the two closest being about 9 in.
apart at the most, while one of the lowest I have known was about 3 \ ft.
off the floor. Most were under some sort of overhead cover. The
enclosure had a small apex roof covering a through path and two nest
were built up under the corrugated plastic roof; while others were under
a felted i-ft. wide sheltered portion around the perimeter of the aviary
roof. Apart from this proximity to overhead cover, the nests themselves
were in relatively open sites.

The hens all went to nest within a few days of each other, the first
seeming to trigger off the impulse in the others ; although courtship display
had been witnessed since early spring and the displays had increased in
frequency until one could hardly ever look into the enclosure without
seeing some birds displaying. In addition to being highly sociable among
themselves these birds were very tame, although all these northern species
seem to be highly tractable. I found that if, when a hen was brooding,
I moved a finger towards the tip of hei bill and then quickly drew it back,
she would tend to snap at it. I took advantage of this behaviour and after
concentrating for a few days on the hen which appeared to be the most
co-operative I had her snapping a mealworm, maggot, waxmoth larva,
sowthistle head or even a small blob of Farex from my fingertip. I carried
on with this procedure until she readily took whatever was offered. The
females were normally fed by the male when incubating and in the early
stages when the young were in the nest, and to some extent this taking of
food from my fingers might have been an extension of this behaviour.

This female was one of the earliest to go down, and the chicks hatched
on 14th June after an incubation period of approximately 14 days. I
usually take an annual holiday at this period of the breeding season and
luckily, on the day the young hatched, a good supply of fresh wood ant
pupae had been collected from a nearby locality. Although a few pupae
had been given prior to this, we were now able to offer dishes of them,
and in addition the co-operative hen was continually offered them while

H

F. MEADEN — NOTES ON BREEDING

she sat on the nest. I cannot recall ever seeing her off the nest while
with eggs or small young, though she might have left it during my
absences from the aviary. Now, with newly-hatched young, immedi¬
ately we fed her with ant pupae, waxmoth larvae, or Farex she would
raise herself up, reach down and feed the chicks. Since on the day this
first happened I had been able to check earlier that only two of the eggs
were hatched some of this food may have provided their first meal. At
this time we had started to use a high protein invalid food, Casilan, of
which a friend had given me a little and which we sprinkled on maggots
and mealworms, and now also on the food offered to the Waxwings. We
continued to feed this bird on the nest frequently and this extra food, in
addition to that brought by the male, was probably critical in that the
young of this brood survived to fledge while others did not.

In other years we had lost the young, apparently because they were
choked by soaked currants given them by the adults. With the hatching
of these young I was anxious to prevent this happening again without
suddenly removing a major part of the food supply and possibly impairing
the fitness of the birds or causing discomfort to those not nesting. We
finally decided to mince the currants so that even if they were fed to the
young they would not choke them. We found, however, that the intake
of currants stopped drastically in any case at this period, and since apple
was still available in quantity and since all the birds were now taking ant
pupae in addition to the usual basic diet there was little harm in stopping
the supply of currants for a short while.

In the nest where the hen had extra food four young hatched but only
three were reared. The young in other nests reached varying stages up
to five days and I feel that the losses were probably due to the impossi¬
bility of providing sufficient live food of the ant pupae type for a flock of
12 adults and three or four broods of young all requiring it at once, with
the result that each only received a limited supply. The male was not
seen to feed the young directly until they were seven or eight days old.
The three young fledged at about a fortnight, at the beginning of July.
About two months later they began to moult into adult plumage. In
doing so they went into a very heavy moult. I wondered whether this
was due to the relatively warm weather. Waxwings seem to suffer from
the heat and I had noticed that the incubating females would sit with
open bills, or rise slightly on the nest in apparent discomfort on warm days.
The young ones moulted so heavily that they could not fly up to their
usual roost perches and therefore roosted in a more open part of the aviary.
They became saturated and chilled during a very heavy rainstorm and
two subsequently died, only the one surviving through to full adulthood.

There is a great deal of nonsense written about this species, including
recommending as a staple diet food such as bread and milk, which might
help as an addition but which is otherwise a poor diet item, or the with¬
holding of some normal foods such as fruits for fear they might stain the

F. MEADEN - NOTES ON BREEDING

!5

plumage; while writers without breeding experience solemnly recommend
only one pair to an aviary. Some of our birds had been with us for 13
years when they were stolen and one must have been 15 years old since
it was fully adult when it first came. I am certain from my experience
that this is one of the simpler birds to keep healthy and in a wonderful
plumage.

As regards the diet, I would still recommend the foods I mentioned in
the previous article — i.e. soaked household currants (strained before use),
grated carrot, greenfood such as brassicas, spinach, watercress, comfrey,
dandelion or similar plants, Farex mixed with milk, softfood, small
quantities of grated Cheddar cheese, together with an occasional pinch
of calcium phosphate and a few drops of multivitamin. This together
with plenty of sweet apple.

A dish of maggots and similar live food is necessary at some times of
year; but in my experience the Waxwings almost completely dispense with
live food in winter, unless the diet is deficient in other respects, in which
case they may take all kinds of exceptional foods. Their intake of live
food rises to a peak in July and August when they would be feeding young.
Berries of Mountain Ash, Elderberry, Blackberry, Berberis and other
berries are very valuable parts of the diet when in season. We give
Sowthistle with seedheads which are pulled off and swallowed whole, the
base going first and the downy end disappearing down the throat last.
This does not seem exceptional since they are said to take similar soft,
ripe seedheads in the wilds. I am doubtful about keeping them with
seedeaters that require hemp in the diet since the Waxwings will remove
and eat these seeds immediately, and I am not sure that the cumulative
effect may not be harmful and overfattening.

REFERENCES

Meaden, F. 1964. Breeding the Waxwing. Avicult. Mag. 70, 191-195.

Meaden, F. and Harrison, C. J. O. 1965. Courtship display in the Waxwing.

Brit. Birds 58, 206-208.

1 6 D. HOLYOAK — OBSERVATIONS ON A PAIR OF GREEN BROADBILLS

5

OBSERVATIONS ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF
A PAIR OF GREEN BROADBILLS

( Calyptomena viridis)

,1

By David Holyoak (London, England)

During April and May 1969 I made brief notes on the behaviour of a
pair of captive Green Broadbills ( Calyptomena viridis) whilst studying
other birds at the London Zoo. Virtually nothing has been published
regarding the calls and behaviour of this species, so it seems worth
recording these observations.

The Green Broadbill is a plump, short-tailed bird, rather larger than
a Starling, from the forests of Borneo. The plumage is emerald green
throughout in the female, with black wing-bars and a black spot behind
the eye in the male bird. The bill is partly hidden by stiff feathers
growing from the base. These observations were made on a male and a
female kept in a cage about 5 ft. x 8 ft. x 12 ft. high with several growing
plants and numerous perches, in a large heated room.. Even for captive
birds they were rather lethargic, remaining perched except for infrequent
bursts of fast whirring flight, and visits to food trays on the cage floor.

Both birds have been heard to give a variety of high-pitched piping
calls, sounding variously like kweea varying to kwee-weer\ and a high
tui-tor call. These notes were given in a wide variety of circumstances,
and some of them probably function as contact calls. A distinctive, soft,
but penetrating, kwoi kwoi kwoi call, repeated about five to ten times,
was often given by both birds; the head of the calling bird being bobbed
in time with each note. This is probably an alarm call, as it was most
often given when I was very close to the wires of the cage, and when the
wires were rattled.

The flight intention movements have two components common in
passerines, a quick upward flick of the wing- tips in which they are lifted
up to a centimetre or so, and at higher intensity, a quick crouching
movement.

The appearance of these birds can change abruptly as they fluff or sleek
their plumage, but besides the fact that the female often fluffed as a
response to slight aggression from the male, and when soliciting copulation,
it was not possible to investigate this with a single captive pair.

Copulation was seen twice, and the associated behaviour was similar
each time. First the male hopped towards the female and perched on a
branch near to, and facing her. He then gaped widely two or three
times, bending the upper mandible back to a remarkable extent and
exposing the bright orange-pink interior of the bill. Before the gaping
movements and interspersed with them the head was tilted back away
from the female with the neck feathers fluffed. On both occasions the

D. HOLYOAK — OBSERVATIONS ON A PAIR OF GREEN BROADBILLS 17

.d.H.

©

DISPLAY POSTURES OF THE MALE GREEN BROADBILL

(1) Gaping to expose the bright orange-pink inside of the bill; (2) tilting
the head back with the neck feathers fluffed.

female responded by crouching low on her perch with the tail horizontal,
the body plumage fluffed, and the wings held partly open and shivering
slightly; then the male fluttered onto her back and mated for three or four
seconds with fluttering wings, before hopping off and perching nearby
preening.

Both birds have been seen to make the wide gaping movement at other
times (the female also has a bright orange-pink inside to the bill) when
mating did not follow. The male bird has been watched regurgitating
food and then swallowing it again, and once the female hopped towards
him as if expecting to be fed, but I have not seen courtship-feeding take
place.

I am grateful to Dr. Peter Olney, the Curator of Birds at Regent’s Park,
for affording me facilities to study the birds in the collection, and to
Clifford Frith and Colin Harrison for drawing the display postures.

#

B

1 8 S. T. JOHNSTONE — KEEPING AND BREEDING FLAMINGOS AT SLIMBRIDGE

KEEPING AND BREEDING FLAMINGOS AT
SLIMBRIDGE

By S. T. Johnstone (The Wildfowl Trust, Slimbridge,
Gloucestershire, England)

Although the Wildfowl Trust started in 1946, it was not until 1961
that we obtained our first Flamingos. These were 12 Chilean, followed
by more Chilean the same year, and later by a consignment of Greater and
Lesser Flamingos from Kenya. In the case of the Chileans, these had
been bought from dealers in Holland and had arrived each with the legs
folded in a flour bag. Of course, the journey was very short and the
birds appeared to be in excellent condition. Unfortunately, the con¬
signment of Greaters and Lessers from Kenya had travelled in crates,
in which they were in a standing position. The divisions in which each
bird was put consisted of rather rough sacking. They had rubbed their
hocks on this sacking and, as a result, the abrasions so caused had become
infected. This appeared to effect the Lesser Flamingos more so than the
Greater and we had considerable losses in the former. Infection of the
joints of the legs of Flamingos would seem to be a most difficult condition
to deal with. Of the antibiotics used Chloromycetin was the most success¬
ful in effecting a cure, but experience shows that great care must be
exercised in the design of the travelling crates. Caribbean Flamingos
were not obtained until the following year, when Antwerp Zoo very
generously presented us with a pair. Subsequently these were added to
by birds purchased from Florida. In 1965, we obtained our first Andean
and James’s Flamingos from Mr. Cordier.

Flamingos are related to wildfowl, but I am afraid our knowledge of
their husbandry and their feeding habits, etc., was not our strong point,
and, having decided that these birds should be added to our collection,
it was imperative that we increased our “ know-how ” as to keeping them.
So whilst collecting the various forms we were, at the same time, visiting
experts in the Zoos seeking their advice, not only as to how the birds
should be fed, but also how to retain their colour and how they should be
kept in winter. The information obtained from the principal collections
both in Europe and America varied a great deal but from it we have
developed our own method of keeping the birds, of providing adequate
nesting sites, and of the way in which they should be fed.

The collection now consists of some 225 birds. 37 Rosy, 74 Chilean,
20 Andean, 50 Lessers, 30 Greaters and 14 James’s.

In order to facilitate their breeding, we designed and built Flamingo
atolls, this involved a considerable amount of work. The draining of
the ponds and then building up with hard-core and rubble two banana
shape ridges, leaving at the ends an opening between them. The rubble
was covered with concrete smoothed down and at an angle of 30 degrees
to the bottom of the ponds. Between the ridges was then filled with

Avicult. Mag,

Copyright ]

Andean Flamingo with chick

[Philippa Scott

S. T. JOHNSTONE — KEEPING AND BREEDING FLAMINGOS AT SLIMBRIDGE 1 9

mud and sea sand, a small entrance at each end left so that water could
flow in and keep the mixture of mud and sand at the right consistency for
the Flamingos to build their mounds. Encouragement was offered them
in the form of concrete replicas of nests, several built close together at
one end of the island.

It was not until 1967 that any nest building activity was apparent. In
this year the Rosy Flamingos built a number of nests. They even planted
a little mud on some of the concrete replicas. There was slight activity
amongst the Chilean Flamingos as well, but no eggs were laid. However,
in May 1968 the activity amongst the Caribbean Flamingos was such that
in a relatively short time some 16 nests were built. In the middle of May,
two eggs were laid on successive days. One must explain that the pen
where the Caribbean Flamingos are kept is overlooked by our Restaurant
and tea terrace, which is separated from the sward of the pen by a low
stone wall. Although a fairly continuous watch was kept to see that
visitors did not enter the pen and disturb the two sitting Flamingos, one
person we had forgotten about, and, one day, when no member of the
Staff was near, the window cleaner arrived to clean the outside of the
restaurant windows. He went over the wall with his ladders and imme¬
diately the incubating Flamingos left their nests. Fortunately a visitor
realized something was wrong and came for a member of the Staff. The
window cleaner immediately left the pen and the birds came back to their
island but one of the two birds at once rejected the egg from its nest,
whilst the other one sat down quite comfortably. The rejected egg was
replaced, but the flamingo again rolled it out. It was thought that if we
continued to return the egg we would cause the second bird to do likewise,
therefore one more attempt was made with a wooden egg and the rejected
egg was placed in an incubator. Likewise the wooden egg was rolled out.

On the 14th June, slight tapping and squeaking was heard from the egg
in the incubator. We decided that the possibility of rearing a young
freshly hatched flamingo was beyond us. We could not reproduce the
regurgitated food with which the parents feed the young. The remaining
egg, that was being incubated by the parent, was therefore examined and
found to be infertile. It was exchanged for the live egg and within 24
hours the first flamingo to be hatched in Britain made its appearance.
The hatching was followed by foul weather for about a fortnight and one
saw the chick on occasions almost covered in mud. It did not leave the
nest during this time and was first seen out of the nest on the fifteenth
day. Both birds shared brooding and both birds fed the young one at
frequent intervals of about 20 minutes; the male taking the major share
of this work. After 17 days, the downy young was seen to be attempting to
feed itself although its main sustenance came from its parents. This was
continued until the bird was almost fully grown and it was seen that the
parent birds were gradually loosing their bright pink coloration. The
young one was removed and put in with our James’s Flamingos for a

20 S. T. JOHNSTONE — KEEPING AND BREEDING FLAMINGOS AT SLIMBRIDGE

period of about a month. After this, on account of it seeming not to be
very happy in its new surroundings, we returned it to the main Caribbean
flock. On its return, the parents, or foster parents as they really were,
showed no further interest and junior fended for itself. After a year its
plumage is bright pink and, if it were not for the fact that its legs are grey
and its hocks black, it would be indistinguishable from the other members
of the flock.

Our Andean Flamingos, of which there are 20, live in a small pen
compared with those of the other flamingos at Slimbridge and are very
close to the public. The only place where we could build their atoll was
within some three or four yards of the main pathway. Here, this year,
they built nine nests and seven birds laid eggs. We were highly excited
as this was the first time that this species had produced eggs in captivity
and we had high hopes of hatching the first Andean Flamingo chick.
But as the termination of the incubation period of each egg occurred
there was no sign of hatching. By this time we had just about given up
hope and decided that the reason for the failure to hatch was that the
birds were pinioned and could not balance themselves for proper copula¬
tion, but on examination, five of the eggs were found to be fertile. Then
to our great joy the seventh egg hatched on the 29th day of incubation.
The chick behaved quite differently from the Caribbean Flamingo. It
happened to fall out of the nest on the day it hatched and it crawled back
in, but on the second day it left the nest of its own volition and after a
very short time it did not bother to return except at night. It is now
well grown, its legs are black and the bill shows no sign of yellow as yet
although the wings are quite pink.

Whilst this activity was going on with the Andean Flamingos, our flock
of over 70 Chilean started a major nest-building campaign. Some 50 odd
nests were built and at least 30 eggs laid, from which 10 young birds have
hatched. As in the case of the Andean, some chicks left the nest after
the second day and scarcely ever returned, except to be brooded by the
parent.

The Rosy Flamingos showed two separate nest-building activities and
we are sorry to say that on neither of these occasions did the birds lay.
Whether flamingos lay every year one has not been able to ascertain.
One suggestion for the failure to lay this year has been that the young
should be removed from the flock or the birds will not re-nest the following
year. This, one feels, has yet to be proved.

A difficulty we have experienced is the wintering of the flamingos, in
particular, the Lessers and Caribbean. The weather at Slimbridge is far
too bleak to leave these birds out, so we have developed a building where
they can be housed, and at the same time, where they can be seen during
the winter months by the visiting public. These consist of rectangular
wooden sheds some 50-60 ft. long by 20 ft. wide — one side of which
contains a number of windows, not only to give light to the birds, but also

HARRY FRAUCA — THE AUSTRALIAN PENGUIN

21

to allow the public to see them. The houses are built over a water course
so that the water is constantly flowing through the buildings and over the
waterway is a large door through which the flamingos can be walked into an
adjoining pen where, if the weather is sufficiently bright and sunny, they
can spend a little time outside. The water runs close to the window side
of the building and represents about a third of the width. The other
part is a gently sloping concrete surface which is trowelled over and then
painted with a rubberized paint to prevent damage to the feet of the birds.
Infra red lamps and strip lighting are provided.

Considerable trouble has been taken regarding the diet of our birds
and various forms have been tried. Finally, the following meal is made
by milling together equal quantities of wheat, dried shrimp, maize,
poultry biscuit and turkey starter crumbs. To this is added minced
lettuce, carrot and beetroot. The whole is then mixed with water con¬
taining Canthaxanthin, Rodophyll and Tylan, into a soup-like consistency.
The soup is fed twice a day.

THE AUSTRALIAN PENGUIN

( Eudyptula minor)

By Harry Frauca (Canberra, Australia)

Although penguins are associated with ice floes and the barren wastes
of the Antarctic, some species never see a chunk of ice in their lives and
among these the Australian fairy or little penguin, Eudyptula minor , is an
interesting example.

An attractive bird standing about 18 in. tall, it has dark blue dorsal
plumage and silvery white breast. Like all penguins it is totally flightless,
its wings being modified for paddling and swimming. It walks in an
upright posture and its appearance, antics and general demeanour captivate
anyone who has the good fortune to encounter it.

There is no difficulty in finding this penguin. There are thriving
colonies of the species on Phillip Island, just a short distance from
Melbourne, on most Bass Strait Islands and all along the coasts of Tas¬
mania. Others are encountered in different parts of coastal southern
Australia with an occasional straggler reaching Moreton Bay, in south
Queensland.

Phillip Island, the Bass Strait islands and Tasmania carry the largest
colonies of this species. In Tasmania, the little penguin appears not to
mind humans at all and may live in the suburbs of Hobart undisturbed.

The well-known Tasmanian ornithologist-author Mr. Michael Sharland
has recorded fairy penguins breeding “ under boatsheds along the Hobart
waterfront. It is a noisy bird and often disturbs people living close to
the water ”.

22

HARRY FRAUCA — THE AUSTRALIAN PENGUIN

The Fairy penguin never goes south and although its movements are
not known, its daily routine has been observed frequently. Usually, the
bird (in parties varying in numbers) spends the day swimming and feeding
on aquatic animals and plants with occasional resting spells on rocks or
sand-bars. On many occasions, during my years in Tasmania, we passed
rocks half-awash in the sea each crowded with a multitude of penguins
taking a rest. There is probably no other bird that can be watched more
easily or at closer quarters. In fact, you can have too much of its some¬
times.

During my student days in Tasmania, we would often go to spend the
night at the penguin rookery on Bruny Island, off the east coast of the
island State, an experience that is unforgettable. The best time for
observations is during the breeding season which extends between August
and March but appears to reach its climax around October-November,
depending on the year. The penguin rookery is situated on the isthmus
linking north and south Bruny and consists of several high sand dunes
rising a couple of hundred feet partly covered with tussock grass. On
the western side of the rookery there is a road with a notice that reads
“ Penguins cross here, drive carefully ”, Beyond the road there is
the D’Entrecasteaux Channel and beyond this the coast of Tasmania. On
the eastern side the dunes slope down to a wide desolate beach and to the
Southern Ocean often bleak and stormy-looking.

Life on the rookery during the day is quiet and peaceful, lulled by the
sounds of the surf and the occasional call of a sea biid. Motor traffic
on the road is rare to say the least. There is not a single penguin to be
seen and you wonder if you are really in a rookery of this species at all.
The penguins are there, right enough. They are in the countless burrows
excavated in the sand, some visible to the naked eye, others concealed by
the tussock grass. At this time of the year, the birds are brooding their
eggs, which are spotless white. A hen penguin may lay one or two or
even three eggs, but there is evidence that one or two form the average
clutch. The burrow varies in depth from about 2 ft. to 3 ft. with the
entrance hole about 6-7 ins. in diameter.

The penguin can be very pugnacious at all times but more so if disturbed
in the burrow during the incubation period. On many occasions, in
order to inspect the bird and the clutch or the parent and the young,
we would thrust an arm into the burrow, an action which caused the adult
bird to emit a series of calls and hammer the hand savagely with its strong
bill. Because of this we had to protect our hands either with gloves or
with socks padded with grass. The fairy penguin is one of the strongest
little wild creatures I have known. As you hold one in your hands you
cannot help wondering at the toughness and compactness of its body.
It is a solid mass of muscle with a thick coat of fat (between the feather
covering and the skin) which forms an insulating layer. The feathers are

Avicult. Mag

Copyright ] [Australian Information Service

Fairy Penguin and chick in burrow.

Avicult. Mag.

Fairy Penguins returning to the nest, Phillips Island, Victoria.

HARRY FRAUCA — THE AUSTRALIAN PENGUIN

23

so short and compact that they look as though the bird was covered with a
skin rather than with an ordinary plumage coat.

In conversation with some ornithologists I was told that many fairy
penguins at the Bruny rookery — and in others — appear not to make the
burrows but to appropriate burrows excavated and abandoned by the
short-tailed shearwater or mutton-bird. Puffinus tenuirostris. This is
possible because the mutton-bird, after breeding in Tasmania, departs on
its fantastic long-distance movement to northern Japan, Alaska and back
to Tasmania again the next breeding season. Thus, if the fairy penguins
become in breeding condition while the mutton-birds are travelling, they
can appropriate empty mutton-bird burrows without finding any opposi¬
tion. On several occasions, we found the Bruny rookery containing
brooding penguins occupied the lower burrows while the mutton-birds
occupied the ones closer to the top of the dunes.

One of the most interesting scenes to be seen in Australia is the penguin
parade on Phillip Island when, at dusk, parties of penguins swim ashore
and cross the beaches to the delight of tourists. But few people have
seen the penguin parade at Bruny Island. I am lucky to have. After
dusk, during the breeding season, dozens of penguins that had spent the
day at sea, swam ashore in parties of four or five or a dozen with an
occasional solitary bird. On landing each penguin would stand in the
sand and shake itself vigorously. Hundreds of them lined the beach at
the water mark, their bodies glistening in our spotlights.

The noise they made cannot be described in words. Their calls rose
high above the pounding of the surf and the wind and mingled with the
calls of the birds that had stayed in the burrows. The result was such
a terriffic din, such a fantastic pandemonium, such an extraordinary
intensity of vocal sounds that you seemed to be in a mad world. Nobody
could forget that experience. Calling intermittently, the newly-arrived
penguins would make for the burrows, waddling across the beach, scaling
the sand dunes, pushing their way through tussocks of grass. Some
strayed into our tents from where they had to be shooed away in no
uncertain terms. The function of the sounds, however, was clear enough.
They served for communication so that each newly-arrived bird eventually
reunited with its partner that had been left behind to incubate the eggs.
The two birds would stand side by side in front of the burrow in a typical
“ nest- relief ceremony ”. They would call softly as though whispering
to each other and bow and touch each other before the two would enter
the burrow. Once the pairs had reunited and retired inside the burrow,
a profound silence fell on the rockery. The sounds of the sea and the
wind were all you could hear.

The silence did not last long though, for around dawn the insane cries
would break the stillness. Leaving its partner in the burrow, a penguin
would now head back for the sea, calling stridently, and it was then when
one of the most amusing scenes in penguinland took place. The penguins

24

J. DELACOUR — THE BIRDS AT CLERES IN 1 969

that had emerged from burrows high on the dunes would slide down the
sand slopes on their bellies. It was indeed a quick way of getting down the
dunes and there is no doubt that the fairy penguin is an expert at it.
Some slid down distances of 40 yards or more and fetched up at the foot
of the dunes where they became almost buried in the soft sand. Long
before sunrise, the rookery would be silent again, a contingent of penguins
incubating the eggs in the burrows, the rest swimming in the Southern
Ocean in pursuit of food.

So the cycle went on. And to me the memory of those nights in the
penguin rookery has remained as one of the most gratifying experiences
in my career as a naturalist. Although occasional penguins are shot by
fishermen for crayfish bait, they are wholly protected throughout Australia
and the thriving rookeries on Bass Strait and Tasmania ensure that we
shall have Eudyptula minor with us for many years to come.

# * #

THE BIRDS AT CLERES IN 1969

By J. Delacour

The summer of 1969 has been one of the best I can remember, as far
as the weather goes, in Western Europe. But it has not been a good
breeding season for birds. The spring was dull and cold and the number
of clear eggs high. Certain species even did not lay at all, particularly
Waterfowl. I suspect that the exceedingly wet and chilly summer of
1968 is partly to blame for it. Just as a number of plants and shrubs
flowered poorly because they had failed to mature their growth properly
the previous season, birds never got into good breeding condition.

A large number of young birds and animals, however, were reared at
Cleres: five Emus, a dozen Rheas, six Black-necked Swans and many
ducks and geese, including Ringed Teal and another brood of five Black
Brants. But there were only six Emperor Geese, while none of Red¬
breasted or Ross laid at all. By luck, the only hybrid produced was from a
male Black Brant and a female Lesser Whitefront (an almost entirely
black bird). A brood of Ruddy Ducks did not survive, the six chicks
having been carried away by the flow of the running water. We now
have two pairs of Trumpeter Swans, sent by the United States Govern¬
ment.

The Tasmanian Water Hens raised 18 young, six under a bantam hen.
All the others were reared in the park by two pairs, which never inter¬
fered. Five Brush Turkeys came out of a mound, a number of Peafowls,
including five green, grew up. Many pheasants and a pair of Naked¬
faced Currasows (Crax fasciolatd) were raised, as well as ten Sonnerats
and a few Ceylonese Junglefowl.

J. DELACOUR — THE BIRDS AT CLERES IN 1 969

25

A number of new birds were acquired during the last season: pairs of
West African Ostriches, Two-wattled Cassowaries and Wattled Cranes,
several Hornbills, Victoria and Sclater’s Crowned Pigeons, Great Argus,
Ijima Copper Pheasants (a gift from Mr. Ed. Fitzsimmons), White-
headed and Ross Touracous, also a number of small tropical birds for the
new accommodations which have been built during the last summer; a
modern bird gallery in what used to be the drawing-room of the chateau
(50 ft. x 25 ft.), destroyed by fire in 1939. There is a dark passage in the
middle of the room, 9 ft. wide, with ten cages on each side, seen through
windows — 16 small compartments (3 ft. x 3 ft. x 5 ft.) and four larger ones
which constitute aviaries. They are all properly heated, ventilated,
decorated and planted. The backs slide up and down, and the cages are
serviced from back corridors. There are no signs of doors or food and
water vessels, which are hidden by rocks, logs and plants and all located
at the back. The hidden tops of the cages and the openings into the
gallery are covered with very thin wire netting, which we prefer to glass.

The collection of small birds in the gallery is varied. There are only
one, two or three birds in each of the smaller cages, while the four flights
can accommodate up to 70. They consist of Hummingbirds, Sunbirds,
Sugarbirds (including Dacni lineata and a Iridophanes pulcherrina ),
Mexican Golden-browed Tanagers ( Chlorophonia callophrys ), all the species
of American painted Buntings ( Passerina ), Red-breasted Parrot Finches, a
pair of small Red-headed Barbets ( Eubucco bourcieri ), a Cock of the Rock, a
Blue and White Indian Flycatcher and several Toucanets. The two larger
aviaries contain big Tanagers (Scarlet, Black-throated, Mountain, Red-
rumped and White-winged Blue), Blue and White Kingfishers, Pittas
(Irena’s and Large-billed), Bellbirds, Amethyst Starlings, Bulbuls and
Leafbirds, Rosita’s Buntings, Black-headed Sugarbirds, Roulrouls,
Silver Chinese Quails, Sand Grouse and a few Waxbills. The two
smaller ones are the home of Calliste Tanagers (10 species), Sugarbirds
and Sunbirds.

Larger aviaries in adjoining halls are inhabited by several species of
Toucans, including the Mountain Blue Andigena laminirostris , Barbets,
Troupials, Weavers, Whydahs and Starlings.

Some of those birds come from the collection of the late Mrs. Milton
Erlanger, as are five Knysna Touracous, all reared in her aviaries at Elberon,
New Jersey, during the past few years. They were presented to me by
her family and they constitute a living memorial to a great bird-lover and
a perfect friend.

We hope to build in 1970 a large tropical garden aviary where exotic
plants and chosen birds will be displayed as they used to be in my green¬
house before 1940. But it will be planned to allow the visitors to walk
through. It no doubt will prove to be an outstanding addition to the park.

26

PAUL FARR ANT - BREEDING MITCHELL’S LORIKEET

BREEDING MITCHELL’S LORIKEET

By Paul Farrant (Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk, England)

My pair of Mitchell’s Lorikeets Trichoglossus haematod mitchellii were
housed in an aviary io ft. x 6 ft. x 3 ft. I gave them a nest-box 1 ft.
square, facing S.E., in the bottom of which I put a thick layer of sawdust.

I had obtained the cock bird in August 1968 and in January 1969 I
got him a mate. They were in this outside aviary all the winter. I fed
them on condensed milk and sponge cakes, also fruit. I tried other
things but without success.

I do not know when egg-laying occurred. I had decided to exchange
these two birds, and one morning at the beginning of May I went into
the aviary to catch them for this purpose. Quite by chance I looked into
the nest-box and saw there were two eggs in it, so naturally I decided to
keep them. The hen did not appear to sit on the eggs except at night,
unless it was cold in the day. I think the hot summer helped.

About a month later I saw that one egg had hatched, and the other one
hatched the following day. I searched in various books to find out what
to feed the young on, and decided to stick to the usual diet, but added
maggots. I looked into the nest-box every time I fed the parents,
which was twice a day. The young were very noisy when being fed.
They wTere fed mostly by the cock bird and soon developed into plump
youngsters covered in greyish down.

One point I found very interesting, the excreta in the nest-box was over
to one corner as though it had been moved there, since the nest had
appeared dirtier on an earlier examination, and the young birds remained
on the clean sawdust the other side.

About two months after they were born (this would be about August)
two heads appeared at the hole in the nest-box. This happened frequently
for about another month and then one bird came out and a few days later
the second one. By this time they were fully feathered and more or less
identical with their parents both in colour and size.

They are now four months old and are flying around with their parents
and feeding themselves on the same diet of condensed milk and sponge
cakes.

When the youngsters first emerged their beaks were black, but they
are now nearly the same colour as those of the parents.

I was very surprised to find these birds much less timid than I had
been led to believe.

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS 27

SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN

ZOOS

By Marvin L. Jones (Oakland, California, U.S.A.)

My visit to Australia took place in mid-June 1969, with very little
forewarning, as my R & R tour from Vietman. I spent six days in the
land “ down-under ” visiting the zoos in Adelaide, Melbourne and
Sydney, plus the Sir Colin Mackenzie Sanctuary in Healesville. This
article devotes itself only to the bird collections in those parks visited.
Unfortunately there was not sufficient time to visit any of the many
private aviaries or even time to notify these people that I was in the
country, much to my great regret. Hopefully on my next visit I can be
more leisurely and see all of the zoos and many of the excellent private
collections as well.

Birds are of course one of the most cared for parts of any animal collec¬
tion in Australia due to the total, complete ban on import of all species
that we would call exotic. This ban has been in effect for almost 20 years,
thus those specimens of Touraco, Birds of Paradise, exotic Cranes,
Macaws, and many others not native to Australia and New Zealand that
I saw, were at least 20 years old. Most were far too old to breed. Some
were in very poor condition with broken toes and drooping wings, but
since each was the last to be seen alive for many years, were cared for like
pieces of gold. The Birds of Paradise in Sydney Zoo for instance are in
many cases establishing new world longevity records, and the male
Ribbon-tail was perhaps the finest I have seen. All came from New
Guinea more than 20 years ago to the private collection of Sir Edward
Hallstrom, who in turn donated them to Taronga Park, Sydney. They
are the last Birds of Paradise alive in Australia.

Because of this total ban, zoos and private fanciers are restricted to the
show of species that are native to Australia, or which were introduced
many years ago and have since become resident, and to New Zealand as
well; species that have reproduced well under captive conditions such as
certain pheasants, finches, weavers and psittacines; the occasional wild
migrant; and of course those still alive that were in zoos at the start of
the ban. It has been reported that one zoo in New Zealand recently
imported a pair of Mute Swans from Europe, however this has not been
substantiated and must not be regarded as a normal experience.

All of the zoos that I visited have large programmes under way to breed
as many foreign or exotic species as possible, and also those native to
Australia. Young from the latter can be used in exchange programmes
with zoos outside of Australia and New Zealand not only as credit for
purchase of exhibitable mammals and reptiles, but as a means of preventing
the large scale smuggling of Australian birds for private fanciers. Hundreds
of individuals of rare species, such as the Golden-shouldered Parrot are
killed each year in the attempts to take them out of the country to dealers

28

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS

in America and Europe. This species is very rare in Australia, and all
efforts are made by zoos and private fanciers to increase the native
population. However, more common forms in Australia, which are still
rare and expensive overseas are those in general bred in large numbers
by the zoos for export. This leaves the native wild population alone, and
of course actually increases one’s knowledge of bird breeding. It would
be wonderful if other zoos, in other lands, used this method to send native
species to zoos, instead of resorting to the capture of wild specimens to
fulfill the needs of collectors. It has placed upon the Australian zoo the
burden of doing its best, and I found that in some zoos the bird curator
has been given greater liberty than in past years. For instance, as many
pens as possible have now been converted to more natural exhibits in
Sydney than previously was the case, resulting in improved hatching
successes.

This of course also has brought not only the zoos closer together (there
is now an Association of Australian and New Zealand Zoo Directors,
formed just six years ago) but has even more importantly joined the
private fancier and the zoo curator into partnerships that has been of great
value, especially in preserving blood lines of exotic gallinaceous birds,
doves and pigeons and psittacines. There remains more to be done with
respect to trading between New Zealand and Australian bird fanciers and
zoos, but a start has been made, brought together by a common need to
maintain stocks as long as possible. As regrettable as such a law is
certainly it has had many beneficial results in bird breeding and husbandry,
so that emphasis has been placed on raising as many forms as possible,
and keeping them alive and healthy as long as possible; actions that zoos
in other lands could well imitate, instead of striving to import as many
species as possible, and breed only those that meet the eye of the interested
curator or fancier. How the wild populations would benefit from such a
more enlightened view !

In describing the collections I will take them alphabetically.

ADELAIDE ZOO, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

I am going to put myself out on a limb so to speak here, by stating
that the Psittacine collection of this zoo impressed me far more than any
other zoo that I have visited in my life. Every feather on almost every
bird was in just the right place, feet were in good condition, and breeding
is taking place among a great many species. In fact all of the birds at
Adelaide look good. There are about 225 species and forms exhibited,
which is about the same number as at Sydney Zoo, so the collection is
large by Australian standards. The emphasis is on psittacines and
gallinaceous birds, about 70 species of the former and 25 of the latter,
many breeding with success. In the attempt to keep macaws as long as
possible a pair has been induced to breed, which has resulted in a series
of hybrids of just about every colour variety possible. Over a half dozen

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS

29

hybrids have been reared thus far, admittedly many with vivid oranges,
golds and greens predominating (the parents are the Blue and Yellow
Macaw A. ararauna and Scarlet A. macao). There are both the Red
and Yellow-fronted New Zealand Parrakeets, Barrabands (which in
Australia are called Superbs), Regents and several fine Princess Alexandra’s
(again the name locally is simply Princess Parrakeet). It was noted that a
great many parrots and parrakeets are named differently in Australia than
in America and Europe, which no doubt is confusing to many working
in this field. The Rosella collection at Adelaide is complete, with all
species and subspecies exhibited, and most raising young. The Red-
capped or Purple-capped Parrots (P. spurius) were exceptionally well
coloured here. There were also Barnards, Cloncurry, Twenty-eight and
Port Lincoln’s Parrakeet; almost all of the species of Neophema and
Psephotus\ and of course many cockatoos such as Slender-billed, Rose¬
breasted or Galah, Pink or Major Mitchell (never called Leadbeater’s in
Australia), Great Palm and all of the other species of Black Cockatoo.
The family of Yellow-tailed was very good looking. In the gallinaceous
birds, which are housed in a series of large runs, I noted perhaps the finest
Swinhoe Pheasant cock that I have ever seen (and a good breeder) several
Razor-billed Curassows, my first Mallee Fowl ( Leipoa ocellata), very large
Brush Turkeys or Megapodes, California Quail, Viellot’s Fire-backed
Pheasant, Germain’s Peacock Pheasant, and some very handsome Burmese
Green Peafowl. Dozens of quail and ornamental pheasants are raised
here each year and traded to other zoos. Of note in the collection are the
last European Flamingoes in Australia; several Little Pied Cormorants;
Yellow-billed and Royal Spoonbills; Blue-winged Shoveller ( A . rhynchotis)\
Australian Little Eagle ( Hieraeetus morphnoides) ; many Boobook Owls;
South African Crowned Crane; North Island Weka Rail; Pacific Gull,
Nutmeg Fruit Pigeon; several Wonga-Wonga and Nicobar Pigeons; all
of the large flightless birds — Ostrich, Emu, Rhea and Cassowary; Little
Blue Penguin; and a fine series of waxbills finches and weavers. Unfor¬
tunately many of the aviaries are very old, however, replacements are
being constructed as fast as funding will allow. All zoos in Australia are
finding it difficult to secure money for capital improvements, and for
many there is a need for new and more modern exhibits. Zoos are
popular in all of Australia, and many now have various education pro¬
grammes under way involving the school age children and adults. Again
almost all are now directed by men who have been in the job less than six
years, men with far more vision than their predecessors and more willing
to co-operate with sister institutions. Here at Adelaide the Director is
Dr. W. E. Lancaster, a veterinarian who formerly lived for many years
in Malaysia, working in fact with a colleague who now runs the Toronto,
Canada Zoo (Dr. Norman Scollard). Adelaide of course is well known
for its large mammal collection, however this will not be discussed here.
The zoo unfortunately has rarely been visited by Americans or Europeans

30 M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS

in the zoo field, an oversight that I hope will be rectified in the future,
for it is well worth taking the extra effort to visit.

THE SIR COLIN MACKENZIE SANCTUARY, HEALESVILLE, VICTORIA

Another zoo that has been rarely seen by fellow Americans, but known
due to the work some years ago of a former Director, Dr. Fleay, is this
paradise called the Sir Colin Mackenzie Sanctuary. Actually the fauna
park that is open to the public, in a setting of large gum trees and native
shrubbery, is only part of the 448 acres devoted to the sanctuary, located
about 40 miles from the centre of Melbourne. I was very impressed with
the care taken not only of the animal collection but the botanical preserve.
Much like my colleague, Dr. Grzimek of Frankfurt, I could have spent
days here enjoying the wonderful scenery and observing the fauna.
Many species are of course wild within the vast limits of the sanctuary
(which cannot be visited by the public) and free within the park itself are
over 200 White Ibis ( Threskiornis molucca) and about 100 King Parrots
( Aprosmictus scapularis). The latter especially are beautiful, alighting in
several areas of the park, much like pigeons in the zoos of the United
States, and feeding from the hands of visitors. But the prize of Healesville,
and I might add, its proudest possession, are the Superb Lyrebirds.

The Lyrebird ( Menura superba) is the only species of bird that cannot
be exported alive under any circumstances. Under complete protection
it has managed to increase in numbers and in fact wild birds may be found
not too many miles from the fauna park. It is however very nervous and
secretive, and wild birds are rarely seen by human observers. Within the
fauna park there is a huge cage, several hundred feet long, replete with
dense vegetation and only a narrow twisting path for visitors (and then
open to the public only for a few hours in the afternoon), for just one
pair of birds. It was my great thrill and pleasure to be allowed by the
Director, Mr. Vernon Mullet, to see the male Lyrebird in his mating
dance. Just a few minutes after I came to the park, about ten in the
morning, he started to call, and what a piercing call it is. The Lyrebird
is a mimic, and a superb one at that, but the range is high and one could
hear it all over the park. We entered the cage, and moving about quietly
and softly came upon him at the start of his dance. Fortunately I was
able to get a few pictures of this, despite the darkness of the cage, and
the denseness of the planting. The dance lasted about 15 minutes and
all the while he would call. Certainly a sight that I will long remember,
and one seen by few Americans. Nothing can quite describe the beauty
and the gracefulness of this performance, the long tail feathers moving
like so much rustling silk, so unlike the feathers of any other bird. The
sanctuary has been able to hatch one bird thus far, and a new aviary is
planned for it. In fact two large new aviaries were under construction
for the expanding Brush Turkey collection, the aim being to breed as
many as possible and to keep them for further study. Most of the
aviaries, except for a few small parrakeets, are set in the landscape and

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS

31

one comes upon them rather unexpectedly. There is a fine walk-through
aviary for native waterfowl and shorebirds. Nearby is a large man-made
lake, holding many millions of gallons of water, on which many rare
Australian waterfowl will be kept. On my visit I managed to see my
first ever living Musk Duck ( Biziura lobata), and also of note were a dozen
Eyton Tree Duck. Other birds in the collection were several Brolga or
Australian Cranes (which also have been bred here); Fairy Penguins;
seven Wedge-tailed Eagles living in a very large and quite unusual cage
that was rectangular in shape, and merely was netting hung on large
telephone poles, placed at outward angles. The cage was large enough
for the birds to fly about, and in it were many living trees. I also saw
several Satin Bowerbird; 12 Chestnut-breasted Teal; nine Cape Barren
Geese; over a dozen Royal Spoonbill; four Gang Gang Cockatoo; about
15 Turquoisine Parrakeets; several Swift and Musk Parrots; Pale-headed,
Crimson, Green, Adelaide and Western Rosella; Blue-bonnet and Red-
rumped Parrakeets; and four Boobook Owls. Again there are many
mammals here such as Platypus (which also lives wild even within the
great fauna park) and native reptiles. The overall theme of course is
species native to Australia and Tasmania. Like the larger zoos it charges
admission. While in some lands it might not be called a zoo, it is recog¬
nized by the federal Australian Government as one of the six class A zoos
in the nation.

MELBOURNE ZOO, VICTORIA

Well known to many American and European zoo men due to the fact
that it carries on a large animal exchange programme, Melbourne is
again an old zoo, struggling to build new quarters and expand its collection,
despite strict import regulations. Unlike some of its sister institutions,
however, it has secured funds necessary for a ten-year programme of
construction, already evident in the largest in-zoo Lion Park anywhere in
the world, a new Reptile House and new exhibits for large mammals.
The zoo has a long series of aviaries which are used exclusively for the
raising of native Australian species for export and for fanciers. I would
say there are about 80 pens, all are relatively new, adequate and successful.
Breeding probably is carried on more than at Adelaide, although there
does not appear to be quite as full a range of species. I would say
about 40 species of psittacines. There are large flight cages, perhaps
larger than any in Europe or North America for terns, gulls, cormorants,
waterfowl, and birds of prey. In addition there are dozens of conventional
cages, and of course some in need of replacement. All are kept clean
and the birds look well. Of course many forms that we would consider
exotic here in America, are common in the areas right outside Melbourne,
such as cockatoos, so one finds all too often cages that are literally crammed
with birds. I counted at least 100 Sulphur-crested Cockatoos and then
gave up. There were several dozen Pennant Parrakeets, which again are
native to this part of Australia. Melbourne is especially successful in the

32

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS

raising of Cape Barren or Cereopsis Geese, over 20 hatched in 1968 alone,
and I counted no less than 16 birds in various parts of the zoo. I also
noted a new race of Skua for me, S. skua lonnbergi , the Southern Skua;
one Australian Pelican (this species is rarer in Australian zoos than in
Europe or America); a pair of Indian Adjutant Storks that have been in
the zoo for 40 years, but which only last year started to make a nest, after
being moved to a new cage — their first next-building attempt in the zoo
(extraordinary!); many Philippine Land Rails; Nankeen Night Herons
(which are also wild in the zoo and raise many young each year); about
17 Eyton Tree Duck; five Semipalmated Geese; a pair of Sarus Crane;
Whistling Eagles (H. sphenurus) ; Gang Gang Cockatoos, and again both
of the New Zealand Parrakeets. The collection is good, well cared for,
and well worth seeing.

TARONGA PARK ZOO, SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

This is of course the zoo best known outside of Australia, although its
specific collection may not be. It is the largest overall zoological garden,
both in land area and in terms of size of the animal collection. There
are about the same number of bird species as Adelaide, however, the
variety is somewhat different. It is the last zoo with Birds of Paradise,
all having come from the collection of Sir Edward Hallstrom, who no
longer has a collection at Mona Vale. Unfortunately, as is well known,
Sir Edward has a passion it seems for concrete, and almost all of the
aviaries were floored with tons of concrete and in fact many cages are of
this material alone, save for the wire. In recent years much of this has
been torn up, and an effort made to make the aviaries as natural looking as
possible. Emphasis has been shifted also to hatching and breeding as
many species as possible. The bird keeper here is a gifted man and is
doing a wonderful job. The zoo also is the recipient of many birds that
have been taken from airplanes and ships in the smuggling process, too
many do not survive being placed in tight airless quarters, but of those
that do make it, the zoo does its best to house them properly. It was
here that I saw some of the unique devices used to try and smuggle |
Golden-shouldered Parrots out of Australia, really just cages inside
attache cases, with little air, and no room to move. But with fanciers and
zoos in Europe and American willing to pay several thousand dollars a
pair, the traffic goes on. I would like to add here, that collectors should
insist on knowing the origin of all birds of this rare species bought from
exotic animal dealers, and not traffic in illegal birds. For it is the birds
that are suffering.

What of the collection at Taronga Park? Well it is growing in many
areas, in fact in some species hatching has been so successful that birds
are being offered to foreign zoos as well as to collections within the nation.
Many however, are very rare, and care is being taken to keep them alive
and healthy as long as possible. Here are the highlights of the Taronga
collection of birds: six Australian Cassowary (and three other cassowary

M. L. JONES — SOME BIRDS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN ZOOS 33

species also); four Kiwi; over 40 Little Blue Penguins; one Australian
Pelican; two Blue Herons ( Demigretta sacra) ; two White-faced Herons;
17 Chilean Flamingoes (all over 20 years of age); about two dozen Semi-
palmate d Geese; about 15 Eyton Tree Duck; four each of Australian and
New Zealand Shelduck; two Grey Teal {gibber if rons) ; about 20 Black
Swan; one female New Guinea Harpy Eagle {Harpiopsi novaehollandiae
the only one in captivity, and again over 20 years old; eight Wedge-tailed
Eagles (this species is still killed by farmers in Australia) ; a trio of Andean
Condor; six Brush Turkeys; about two dozen King Quail {Excalf actor ia
chinensis ); about two dozen Blue Peafowl; Lineated Pheasant; one Sarus
Crane; one East African Crowned Crane (last in Australia); one Stanley
Crane; two Australian Bustard; about 150 Jobi Dove {Gallicolumba
jobiensis ); about 50 Nicobar Pigeon; 20 Victoria Crowned Pigeon (all over
20 years old); several Spinefex Pigeon; about 55 Rainbow Lorikeet
{Trichoglossus h. moluccanus); five Palm Cockatoo; six male Eclectus; a
pair of Glossy Black Cockatoo (C. lathami)\ about 80 Sulphur-crested
Cockatoo; about 40 Little Corella Cockatoo; about 70 Pink Cockatoo
{Leadbeater' s) ; 25 King Parrots; 30 Pennant Parrakeet; 20 Pale-headed
Rosella; about 60 Elegant Grass Parrakeets; 15 Swift Parrots {Lathamus
discolor ); more than 100 Rose-faced Lovebird (one huge group); nearly
50 lutino Indian Ring-necked Parrakeet; the last White-crested Turaco
in Australia; a male New Guinea Coucal; about 15 Tawny Frogmouths;
one pair of Blue-winged Kingfisher {Dacelo leachi) with one bird hatched
in Taronga this past year; no less than three dozen Kookaburra (this is a
common local form, brought to the zoo like starlings are brought to zoos
in America); a female Dollar Bird {Eurystomus orientalis)\ many rare
Australian Honey-eaters such as Lewin {Meliphaga notata), Noisy Miner
{Myzantha) ; Noisy Friar-bird (. Philemon ); two male Superb Lyrebirds;
Black-backed Piping Crow (which also is wild in the park); Brown and
Pied Currawongs {Strepera intermedia and graculina ); a pair of Regent
Bowerbirds; Great Bower Bird {Chlamydera nuchalis)\ eight Satin Bower
birds; about 100 Java Sparrow; 60 Zebra Finch; and in birds of paradise
—four Black Manucode {Phonygammus keraudreni) ; one Green Manucode
{Manucodia chalybeata orientalis)\ male Ribbon-tail {Astrapia mayeri);
female Lesser Sickle-billed Bird of Paradise {Epimaches meyeri ); male
Prince Rudolph’s Blue; female Finsch’s Lesser Bird of Paradise; female
Emperor of Germany’s Bird of Paradise ; male Stephanie’s Bird of Paradise
and a single male Count Raggi’s Greater Bird of Paradise, all of these
birds having been in Australia almost 20 years and captured adult.
Director at Taronga is Dr. Ronald Strahan, a professional zoologist who
is creating a new staff with emphasis in education.

I might have added that labelling in all of the zoos is excellent ; in most
there are coloured paintings of the birds and range pictures, this perhaps
best at Sydney and Adelaide.

# * #

C

34

OBITUARY

OBITUARY

A.S.

1879-1970

Allen Silver died in Llantarnam, on 4th January, 1970, in his 91st year.

Born at Long Melford, Suffolk in 1879, he had the inborn interests of
a countryman. Very early his leanings veered largely in the direction of
British passerine birds and although he specialized in passerines and
picarenes he was, nevertheless, keenly interested in all birds, whether
ornamental pheasants, waterfowl, show or utility poultry or pigeons; in
addition, he took no little interest in mammals, fish and insects. At one
time or another he owned examples of the majority of European cage-birds
and a very large proportion of the imported exotic species, varying from
sunbirds to macaws.

As far back as 1895 he was appointed a judge of cage-birds and from
then until very recent times he officiated at shows throughout the country.
He judged at many Crystal Palace Shows, both before and after the first
World War, and the National was not, of course, complete without his
presence.

In his time he was a very prominent exhibitor, staging as many as sixty
birds at a single show. In the late 1920s he won all the principal
Budgerigar trophies, several outright.

He was elected a Member of the Foreign Bird Club in 1903, and of the
Avicultural Society in 1904, of which he was doyen and Vice-President
since 1958. With several others he founded the Budgerigar Club, of
which he was Chairman for the first three years, also Editor of the
Budgerigar Bulletin for the same period. Long before this he was closely
connected with the National British Bird Club, the London Cage Bird and
London Provincial Ornithological Societies, and in 1911 he resuscitated
the Foreign Bird Exhibitors’ League.

Allen Silver contributed only infrequently to the Magazine but his
writings were many and varied. He revised Bradburn’s Book of British
Birds; compiled The Birdkeepers ’ Guide; wrote British Bird Management ,
The Parrot Book and the bird section of The Wonder Book of Pets. He
was on the staff of Canary and Cage Bird Life during its existence, British
and foreign bird expert to The Feathered World , and, of course, foreign
bird expert to Cage and Aviary Birds.

Despite the incredible hardship of losing a leg in the 1914-1918 War,
Allen Silver was ever cheerful and always so willing and helpful. A
natural gentleman and a great bird-lover his passing leaves another
unfillable gap. A. A. P.

NEWS AND VIEWS

35

NEWS AND VIEWS

E. Norgaard-Olesen, Janderup, Denmark, reports the rearing of a
Fire-fronted Bishop. One Blue-naped Mousebird Colius macrourus was

bred and the Red-faced C. indicus had eggs.

* * #

The Simon Harvey Memorial Medal, awarded annually by the Avicul-
tural Society of South Australia for the most outstanding breeding
achievement of the year, has been awarded to Russ Rowlands, for breeding

the Green Catbird Ailuroedus crassirostris, 1968-69.

# # #

Paul Farrant: “ I bred five young Redrumps, and was interested to find
that when the hen died, the young were only three weeks old, the cock
carried on and brought up all five young quite successfully.”

* # #

Major Iain Grahame reports that Vulturine Guineafowl have again
been bred at Daw’s Hall Wildfowl Farm. Up to October, three young
have been successfully reared, and more eggs are expected in November
and December. Other birds bred this year include Satyr Tragopans
and Red-breasted Geese.

# # *

The Society’s Certificate of Merit was awarded to the Zoological
Society of London for its success in breeding the Grey-backed Thrush
Turdus dissimilis hortulorum in 1968, when nests of four and two were
reared. Some of the young ones went to Derek England and a brother
and sister successfully carried the breeding to the second generation.
England is naturally anxious to obtain some new blood!

G. R. Phipps, Greenacre, New South Wales: “ I was very interested
to read Guthrie Hall’s report (1969, 113) on the Golden Pheasant which
“ changed its sex ”. I, too, have a hen in my collection which except
for the lack of a white ring around the eye, and for the fact that the wing
primaries are heavily suffused with browTn, is in every way identical to a

cock” * * *

Allen Silver wrote: “A correspondent, Mrs. P. Shepherd, Dukeswell,
nr. Honiton, Devon, informs me that her pair of Quakers raised seven in
one round in 1968, and this year ten youngsters in two rounds — 17 in
two years. The breeder lost two from the first round ; one from a burst
blood vessel(?) and another from coming out too early and dying from
exposure to deluge from storms.”

* # #

The Cream-coloured Courser Cursorius cursor cursor , an Ethiopian
and S. Palaearctic species is a rare vagrant in Great Britain.

The advent of one in a sugar-beet field, near Great Yarmouth, towards
the end of October, caused very great interest and many ornithologists

36

NEWS AND VIEWS

visited the area in the hope of seeing it. But unfortunately it survived

only a few weeks: it was found badly mauled, presumably by a cat.

* * *

Dr. E. P. McCabe, Jr., San Antonio, Texas: “ I reared five Cloncurry
Parrakeets during last spring and summer. The first clutch of two
proved to be a pair. The adults again went to nest in May. The cock
died soon after the hen commenced incubating but she hatched three
chicks which I hand-fed and successfully reared. As they were two cocks
and a hen I now have three each of both sexes.”

* # #

The Royal Zoological Society of South Australia reports that during
the 1968-69 season 134 birds of 37 species and varieties were bred in the
Adelaide Zoological Gardens. The outstanding event was the breeding
of three Banded Landrails Hypotaenidia pliilippensis , a probable “ first ”
in the Gardens. For the fifth year running a Blue and Yellow x Scarlet
Macaw hybrid was reared. A Leadbeater’s Cockatoo was reared, the
first in 15 years, also six Queen Alexandra’s Parrakeets. The Rosellas
did particularly well, six of the ten species in the Collection — Yellow,
Northern, Western, Eastern, Golden-mantled and Pale-headed — reared
16 young between them.

The Brush-Turkeys Alectura lathami again did well, 24 young hatched

from the mound and only three failed to survive.

* * *

Hartley King: “ We have had a very dry winter here in Western
Australia, and there is little prospect of much rain during the forthcoming
summer. The effect of this is very noticeable in the breeding habits of
our wild birds and wildlife generally.

The marsupials are withholding their young; the waterfowl have had
such a poor season that duck shooting is to be prohibited; our parrots
that would normally have young on the wing have not gone to nest yet,
and so on.

Most of the farmers’ dams are dry, and water restriction will be
inevitable before Christmas.

This trend is reflected in our aviary birds, but not by any means to the
same extent. My pair of Banded Plovers have already raised three
young and are nesting again. (Last year — from June to June — they
raised six lots of chicks.)

My Neophemas have made a good start; Scarlets, Turquoisines and
Bourkes have chicks; Crimson and Pale-headed Rosellas, Barrabands,
Kings and Cloncurries have gone to nest. Likewise the Blue Mountain,
Scaly and Varied Lorikeets.

The finches have been in full swing for some time: Masked, White¬
eared Masks, Gouldians, Long-tailed, Parsons, Diggles, Stars, Pictorellas,
Chestnuts, Orange-breasteds, Fires, Double-bars, etc.”

NEWS AND VIEWS

37

A world record auction price for a printed book of £90,000 was paid
at Sotheby’s on 24th November 1969 for a copy of Audubon’s “ The
Birds of America Sold anonymously it was bought by Mr. Kenneth
Nebenzahl, a Chicago bookseller. The almost unbelievable price is
accounted for by the fact that this very rare work is a superb copy ‘ in
the finest possible condition ”.

John James Laforest Audubon (1785-1851) was the illegitimate son of a
Creole and a French naval officer, who adopted him and took him to
France, where he studied painting and developed a love for natural history.
North America became his home but due to his passion for bird painting
various business ventures did not thrive and he was forced to support his
family by painting portraits. Returning to Europe in 1821, successful
exhibitions in Liverpool and Edinburgh encouraged him to issue a
prospectus of a work that was to ensure him a place amongst America’s
immortals.

“ The Birds of America ” was issued without text (which followed in
1 83 1~39 under the title “ Ornithological Biography ”) during 1827-38,
in 87 parts of five plates each. It was published at two guineas the part,
or £182 14s. od. the set ($1,000 in the U.S.A.). The 435 copper-plate
engravings, coloured by hand, contain 1,065 fife-size figures of 489
supposedly distinct species. It is believed that fewer than 200 complete
sets, usually four volumes, were bound up.

* # #

In a review of “ Henry Walter Bates ”, by George Woodcock, in
The Geographical Journal , September 1969, 456-7, Dr. Edward Hindle
refers to a plate in The Naturalist on the River Amazons , by H. W. Bates,
showing the author being mobbed by toucans. It may not perhaps be
without interest to recount Bates’ account published in 1863, of the
affair with the Curl-crested Toucan Pteroglossus heauharnaisii. He
writes: “ I had an amusing adventure one day with these birds. I had
shot one from a rather high tree in a dark glen in the forest, and entered
the thicket where the bird had fallen, to secure my booty. It was only
wounded, and on my attempting to seize it, set up a loud scream. In an
instant, as if by magic, the shady nook seemed alive with these birds,
although there was certainly none visible when I entered the jungle.
They descended towards me, hopping from bough to bough, some of
them swinging on the loops and cables of woody lianas, and all croaking
and fluttering their wings like so many furies. If I had had a long stick
in my hand I could have knocked several of them over. After killing
the wounded one I began to prepare for obtaining more specimens and
punishing the viragos for their boldness; but the screaming of their
companion having ceased they remounted the trees, and before I could
reload, every one of them had disappeared.”

A. A. P.

38

NOTES

NOTES

THE ADVENTURES OF AN ESCAPED RED-BILLED BLUE MAGPIE ,

Last June the cock of a pair of Red-billed Blue Magpies escaped. This I 1
discovered when it appeared suddenly on a fence, bowled a grey squirrel head-over- .
heels, stole a nut it was eating, and disappeared into the blue. Normally I get
innumerable reports when one of my birds escape but strangely enough I heard
nothing of this bird until mid-November when I received a telephone call asking
if I could identify a strange bird which had been resident in a strip of woodland
in Riddlesdown since last June, and which regularly visited four or five gardens
backing onto the wood. Apparently a report had appeared in the local press
two weeks previously, but I had missed it. From the description I was pretty
sure it was my magpie, so on the following Sunday I took the hen, in a large
parrot cage, and a trap cage, up to one of the gardens it was said to visit daily;
arriving at 8 a.m. when it was still only just getting light.

As I was hoisting the cage onto a shed roof I heard the bird “ chuckle ” some
distance off, and the hen promptly replied. The trap cage, baited with mice, I
put on top of the parrot cage, and retired to a garage with a convenient window
overlooking the garden. Within five minutes the cock was on the shed roof,
rushing round and round the cage, displaying just like a golden pheasant, with j
tail spread, wing trailing and body twisted towards the hen. Twice he fell off the
roof in his excitement, once he caught the tip of the hen’s tail through the wire
and nearly pulled it out. Then he sat still for about five minutes, apparently to
recover his breath before again circling the cage, and at last jumped up on top,
onto the trap, where he spotted the mice and without hesitation dived in. The
lid came down with a smack but he never even glanced up, just grabbed a mouse
and commenced eating. By g a.m. he was back in his aviary, both he and the
hen having eaten five mice between them on my journey home.

The next day he sulked, but the day after was completely rehabilitated and
seemed tamer than he was prior to his escape. He was in perfect condition,
having evidently moulted during his freedom, his bill and legs being now deep
orange (they had faded to dull yellow in the aviary), and strangely, one central
tail feather which had always been slightly faulty was now pure white.

K. A. Norris.

CORRESPONDENCE

VITAMINS AND FRENCH MOULT
So much has been written on feather malformation generally, and French Moult
in budgerigars in particular, that I hesitate to take up more space on this subject.
It is, however, an important matter, especially to the afflicted birds, in whose
interest I feel prompted to write.

One of the main factors making birds aware of the advent of the breeding
season is the production in their bodies of vitamin D by the action of the ultra¬
violet rays in sunlight on a substance called ergosterol in the body. This oil-
soluble vitamin is popularly called the sunshine vitamin. Most budgerigar breeders
start the season early, in the short winter days when little ultra-violet light penetrates
our atmosphere, and they therefore add vitamin D to the diet, usually in the form
of cod-liver-oil added to the seed. However, Vitamin D is not something of
which it may be said that if a little is good a lot will be better. Too much is harmful
to human beings, causing excess calcium and phosphorus retention and a rough
skin condition. There is, of course, no harm done in feeding the small amount
of cod-liver-oil recommended by the makers to bring the birds into condition, but
it must be remembered that what is the correct amount in the short winter days
can be excessive when the birds are producing their own vitamin D in spring and
summer conditions.

CORRESPONDENCE

39

I believe that the supply of vitamin D by oil-soaked seed should stop well
before the young are due to hatch, as apart from the vitamin being cumulative in
the body, in the wild state the young of virtually all parrot-type birds do not
emerge from a dark nest-hole until fully feathered, and clearly will receive only the
very small amount of vitamin D provided naturally by the parents during the
feather-forming period.

No theory can be proved without a number of controlled tests (which I
unfortunately do not have the opportunity to carry out), but in support I can
quote from my own experience some years ago when breeding from four or five
pairs of budgerigars. The birds were kept outside and the first early round with
cod-liver-oil and artificial light to lengthen the feeding hours was quite successful.
Cod-liver-oil was continued throughout the season, and all subsequent young
with the exception of two albinos had malformed feathers to a greater or lesser extent,
many being cases of French Moult at its worst.

It would be wrong to suggest that only budgerigars can be fitted into this theory,
but they are the species most prone to French Moult and they do feed their young
on a regurgitated paste derived from the seed provided. I would also, in con
elusion, like to quote from an excellent little book which I read recently “ Halfmoon
and Dwarf Parrots ” in which the author, William Allan, advises strongly against
keeping a caged bird by a window. Apart from the draught possibilities he writes
(in Dallas, Texas, where the sun is the large de luxe model) that the sunlight
causes the bird to undergo a continuous moult.

I find the connection between excessive vitamin D and feather abnormalities
inescapable, but it would require a lot of feeding trials to prove it.

The Garden House, R. W. Phipps.

Battlemead Close,

Maidenhead, Berkshire.

RELEASING BIRDS AT LIBERTY OR SEMI-LIBERTY
Like many members, I am sure, the correspondence about foreign birds being
released in the countryside — whether by accident, intention, or “ controlled
liberty ” — has been of great interest to me. I am certain that the participants in
the debate have all seen the current issue of Ibis , but for members who have not
it may be of interest to make note of a letter from R. O. Vicente in Portugal. The
letter is headed “A new introduced species in Europe: the Red-eared waxbill ”.
The substance of the letter is that Estrilda troglodytes has been observed living
and breeding in the wild in Portugal on several occasions during the past five years.
Flocks of up to 300 have been observed, and both nests and juvenile birds have
been seen on various occasions. The purpose of Mr. Vicente’s letter was to ask
for any ornithologists holidaying in Portugal to keep an eye open for the species
and report it.

Having newly arrived in Madrid where I expect to live for the next couple of
years, the letter is of extra interest to me. This is not the point though. The
existence of ringed individuals in the flocks shows that they are almost certainly
from an avicultural source, so the culprits are known though their motives are
not. It remains to be seen how well the Red-earned waxbill establishes itself in
Portugal; if holidaying bird watchers do oblige Mr. Vicente, and the species can
be shown to have claimed an ecological niche in competition with local avifauna
then the contributors to the debate will surely be nearer a conclusion.

c/o J. Walter Thompson Company S.A., Robin L. Restall.

Arapiles 13, Madrid 15, Spain.

4o

CORRESPONDENCE

LONGEVITY IN PARROTS

I am writing in response to your request in the September-October issue of
The Avicultural Magazine for information on cases of longevity in parrots.

On 1 2th May i960, I obtained from Mrs. Dale Ellenberger of this city the body
of a male Amazona aestiva aestiva (the Brazilian race of the Blue- or Turquoise-
fronted Amazon). This bird had been in the continuous possession of Mrs.
Ellenberger’s family, and I was told that it had been purchased in Rio de Janeiro
approximately 70 years before its death; the family did not have the exact year,
but according to family tradition, the bird was about 75 years old at its death.

The bird was in excellent condition, with moderately enlarged gonads, and was
just completing a moult. I made no attempt at autopsy; in view of the known
great age of this bird, I thought its body might conceivably be of interest to some
researcher, so I prepared a study skin (Carnegie Mus. no. 139,369) and preserved
the remainder of the carcass in spirits (C.M. alcoholic collection no. 844).

I hope this information is of interest to you.

Carnegie Museum, Kenneth C. Parkes, Curator of Birds.

Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 15213, U.S.A.

Concerning the note in The Avicultural Magazine about longevity in parrots,
I wonder whether the following may be of some interest. A good many years ago,
while I was at the London Zoo, I was called upon to go to the house of a Harley
Street specialist — actually to remove a closed ring from the leg of a canary, which
had become embedded in the flesh and which, incidentally, was successfully
accomplished without any harm resulting. In conversation afterwards, the
gentleman showed me an African Grey Parrot which was in a large cage in a front
room overlooking Harley Street and told me that to his undoubted knowledge,
it had stood there for the last 60 years. As it was in excellent condition, there
could have been no reason to suppose that it might not continue to stand there
for many years afterwards. Judging between this species and the common species
of Amazons usually kept, it does seem in my experience that the former often
excels in longevity, as I, when Overseer of birds, received many queries by phone
and otherwise, concerning Amazons which through weakness apparently due to
age, were unable to perch after reaching an age of from 30 to a maximum of 40
years to their owners knowledge ; although, of course, there may be many exceptions.
Cockatoos, as everyone knows, are very long-lived but one does not hear so much
about Macaws, perhaps because they are not so easy to house for the ordinary
person.

53 Dollis Road, E. B. Tanner.

Finchley, London, N.3.

The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles,
notes, or correspondence.

THE AVICULTURAL
SOCIETY

FOR THE STUDY OF
BRITISH & FOREIGN BIRDS
IN FREEDOM & CAPTIVITY

OFFICERS AND COUNCIL 1970

President

A. A. PRESTWICH

Vice-Presidents

Dr. J. Delacour
Allen Silver

G. S. Mottershead

Sir Crawford McCullagh, Bt.

J. J. Yealland

Hon. Editor

Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, M.B.E.

Hon. Assistant Editor

C. J. O. Harrison

Hon. Secretary-Treasurer

A. A. Prestwich

Hon. Assistant Secretary

Miss Kay Bonner

Members of the Council

J. O. D’eath

A. V. Marques
K. A. Norris

C. M. Payne, O.B.E.

D. H. S. Risdon
Mrs. K. M. Scamell
D. T. Spilsbury
Mrs. P. V. Upton

M. D. England, O.B.E.
D. Goodwin
C. J. O. Harrison

L. W. Hill
H. Hor swell

F. E. B. Johnson

P. L. Wayre

Hon. Auditor

J. Watkin Richards, Certified Accountant

OFFICERS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY
PAST AND PRESENT

PRESIDENTS

1894- 1895

1895- 1920

1921-1925

1926-1955

1956-1963

1964-1967

1967-

The Countess of Bective
The Rev. and Hon. F. G. Dutton
(later Canon, and Lord Sherborne)
The Rev. H. D. Astley
A. Ezra, O.B.E.

D. Seth-Smith
Miss E. Maud Knobel
A. A. Prestwich

VICE-PRESIDENTS

1894-1895

The Rev. and Hon.

F. G. Dutton

1925-1951

Dr. E. Hopkinson,
C.M.G., D.S.O.

1895-1900

The Right Hon. the

1938-1962

J. Sped an Lewis

Baroness Berkeley

1948-

Dr. J. Delacour

1896-1899

Sir H. S. Boynton, Bt.

1949-1963

Miss E. Maud Knobel

1899-1906

A. F. Wiener

1950-1955

D. Seth-Smith

1906-1937

Her Grace the Duchess

1952-1961

E. J. Boosey

of Bedford

1958-

Allen Silver

1925-1927

Her Grace the Duchess

1962-

G. S. Mottershead

of Wellington

1963-

Sir Crawford

1925-1935

The Lady Dunleath

McCullagh, Bt.

1925-1942

H. R. Fillmer

1964-1967

1967-

A. A. Prestwich

J. J. Ye ALL AND

HON. SECRETARIES

1894-1896 Dr. C. S. Simpson
1896-1899 H. R. Fillmer
1899-1901 J. Lewis Bonhote
1901-1903 R. Phillipps
_ _ _ T _ _ j f R. Phillipps
1 903-1904 1 Dr a g Butler

_ jT. H. Newman

1904 i909|Dr a g Butler

_ f R, I. Pocock

1909 !9I4|Dr a g Butler

H. Newman

1914-1916^ Dr a g Butler

* Miss R. Alderson

i9i6-i9i9>! Dr a g Butler

^ ^ j Dr. L. Lovell- Keays

1919-1920^^ a g sutler

1921- 1922 J. Lewis Bonhote

1922- 1948 Miss E. Maud Knobel

1949- A. A. Prestwich

HON. ASSISTANT SECRETARY
1950- Miss Kay Bonner.

HON. TREASURERS

1894-1897

1897-1899

1899-1901

1901-1906

1906-1913

1913-1917

H. R. Fillmer
O. E. Cresswell
J. Lewis Bonhote
W. H. St. Quintin
J. Lewis Bonhote
B. C. Thomasett

1917-1919

1920-

1921- 1922
1923-1948
1949-

A. Ezra

Dr. L. Lovell-Keays
J. Lewis Bonhote
Miss E. Maud Knobel
A. A. Prestwich

HON. EDITORS

1894-1896

1896-1899

1899-1901

1901-1907

1907- 1908

1908- 1909

1909- 1910

{

1910-1912

1912-1917

1917-1920

1920-1923

{

Dr. C. S. Simpson
H. R. Fillmer
H. R. Fillmer
O. E. Cresswell
D. Seth-Smith
D. Seth-Smith
Dr. A. G. Butler
D. Seth-Smith
Frank Finn
Frank Finn
J. Lewis Bonhote
J. Lewis Bonhote
The Rev. H. D. Astley
Dr. Graham Renshaw
R. I. Pocock
D. Seth-Smith

1924 The Marquess of

Tavistock (later His
Grace the Duke of
Bedford)

1925 The Marquess of

Tavistock
D. Seth-Smith
1926-1934 D. Seth-Smith
1935 The Hon. Anthony

Chaplin (later the
Right Hon. Viscount
Chaplin)

Miss E. F. Chawner
1936-1938 Miss E. F. Chawner
1939- Miss Phyllis Barclay-
Smith, M.B.E.

MEDALLISTS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

THE PRESIDENT’S MEDAL

Miss Phyllis Barclay- Smith, M.B.E., 14th March, i960.
Arthur Alfred Prestwich, 14th March, i960.

Dr. Jean Delacour, 13th March, 1967.

THE KNOBEL AWARD

Sten Bergman, D.Sc., 14th March, i960.
Curt af Enehjelm, 14th March, i960.

THE EVELYN DENNIS MEMORIAL AWARD
Mrs. K. M. Scamell, 13th November, 1967,

When Visiting the

COTSWOLDS

A VICULTURISTS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

A Guide to the
Names of Parrots

A complete list of the scientific names admitted by
Peters, together with their derivations and
appropriate English names.

Price 5s. 6d., post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

STUDIES ON GREAT CRESTED
GREBES

By

K. E. L. SIMMONS
Price 5/6 post free

-O

PUBLISHED BY

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY
GALLEY’S WOOD
EBENBRIDGE, KENT

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGS DEN BIRD GARDENS

The largest private collection of ornamental game birds in the
British Isles, also Waterfowl and Rare Breeds of Poultry, etc.

Open every day

10 a.m. to 7 p.m. or sunset if earlier

Send 3/- for a 40 -page brochure

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422
The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Tel.: Oakley 2745

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY : 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier

PRICES OF ADMISSION
Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicultural Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 4s. ( non-members ) Children: 2/6

Parties of 25 and oyer: 2/6 each Organised school parties: 1/6 each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance

NO DOGS ALLOWED

HOW TO GET TO THE WILDLIFE PARK

The Ornamental Pheasant Trust and Norfolk Wildlife Park are on the mail
A 1067 — 14 miles from Norwich.

Stay at the

WINDSOR HOTEL

Lancaster Gate, London , W.2

Centrally placed for London’s famous parks,
fashionable West End shops, theatres and cinemas.
A quiet, friendly and gracious hotel, with comfortable
bar, near West London Air Terminal and Paddington
Station. Radio and Telephone in all 150 bedrooms,
many with bath and shower. Food and wines
excellent. Welcome to elegant London.

Reservations 01-262 4501

A KINGSLEY-WINDSOR HOTEL

For your
greater comfort ...

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A36 at The Red Liont Woolverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

OPEN DAILY
including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

No dogs admitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 326

All interested in Parrakeets should read

'AUSTRALIAN PARRAKEETS’

By Dr. KLAUS IMMELMANN Edited by A. O.B.— Belgium
Price 42/- post paid

Payment by cheque in favour of A.O.B., England, addressed to
Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel, Lembeek (Bt.), Belgium

A. FRED STURGIS

Kearneysville, West Virginia, TJ.S.A.
A NICE COLLECTION OF WATERFOWL AND TRAGOPANS
NO BIRDS FOR SALE

WANTED — Red-Breasted and Ne-Ne-Geese

WATERFOWL RINGS

Members are reminded that the Society’s special blue rings are always
available. All waterfowl in collections, both public and private, should

carry them.
Size

REVISED PRICES

Price per dozen

2-3

Teal ....

s d

. 10 0

3

Wigeon

. 11 0

4

Mallard, Pintail, etc.

, 12 0

4-5

Smaller geese

13 0

5

Greylag

15 0

Orders for rings should be addressed to the Hon. Secretary, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the:

Hon Secretary, Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone : Henlow Camp 342

SPECIAL

BIRD

FOODS

FAMOUS

SINCE

1823

Universal
For Soft Bills
1 lb. 6/6.

3£ lbs. 21/3.

7 lbs. 38/7.

28 lbs. 130/0.

Bekfin

Insectivorous
Fine Grade

* lb. 4/6.

1 lb. 8/6.

3i lbs. 29/0.

Mynah Food
just add water
and use.

1 lb. 6/2.

3£ lbs. 20/3.

7 lbs. 36/7.

C.L.O.

Rearing and Condition Food
1 lb. 4/3.

3£lbs. 13/8.

7 lbs. 23/9.

HEALTH GRAINS

A Condition seed highly prized by continental
breeders, and containing a blend of flower, vegetable
and tree seeds which are not normally obtainable in
this country. 3 oz. packet 1/6.

“ GREENSTUFF ”

A dehydrated form of green-food consisting of lettuce, spinach, carrot, etc., readily taken
by all birds. Packets 1/8 and 6/4.

All the above prices are carriage paid and Purchase Tax paid.

MIXED NUT KERNELS (Not for human consumption)

3* lbs. 8/6. 7 lbs. 16/0. 14 lbs. 30/0.

PET LITTER

By P. SLUIS consisting of a special kind of clay which is noted for its absorbency. It is
packed in sprinkler top drums, and is indispensable for the trays of Mynahs and other
large softbills. It entirely eliminates the use of newspaper or other means of keeping the
cage trays of these large birds clean and hygienic, and is guaranteed harmless. From
your usual dealer at 1/6 per drum, or we can send direct for 3/- post paid: 3 drums for

6/- post paid.

MEALWORMS

ENGLISH BRED (Small Type)

loz. 3/6 2 oz. 61- 4 oz. 10/- 8 oz. 17/6

lib. 29/- 21b. 54/- 41b. 97/- 61b. 139/- All Carriage Paid

FEEDING SUNDRIES

Budgie Iodised Pecks . .6 for 3/6
Peanut Kernels . . . . 7 lbs. 1 5/-

Brazil Kernels .. ..7 lbs. 15/-

Dried Shrimp \ lb. 2/3 lib. 3/6

i lb. 1 lb.

Pure Dried Egg . . . . 6/6 12/6

Dried Rowan Berries (Whole) 2/9 4/6

,, „ „ (Crushed) 3/- 4/9

Pure Breadcrumbs (Fine, Medium or Coarse), far superior to Biscuitmeal
141b. 17/6; 281b. 28/-

“ Egg-crumbs ” guaranteed to consist of 90 per cent breadcrumbs and 10 per cent pure egg
21b. 5/6; 41b. 10/6; 71b. 17/6

ALL ABOVE PRICES ARE POST PAID

E. W. COOMBS, LTD.

25, FRINDSBURY ROAD, STR00D, KENT.

Telephone: Medway 79886/7

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members * advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement , which must be sent to A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column , but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable .

Wanted. Waterfowl of the Worlds Australian Finches , Avicultural Magazine ,
New Series, Vol. VI: — A. Birtles, 169 Royds Street, Rochdale, Lancs.

The Planning Authorities have approved the use of 10 acres of land for Bird
Gardens, Pleasure Gardens, etc. It is surrounded by woodland and it is adjacent
to a delightful Manor House (occupied by owner). There is adequate space for
parking and its situation is close to four main towns, convenient for the M. 1 and
A.5. It is believed that this could be developed into a very lucrative “ Bird and
Pleasure Gardens ”, etc. It is proposed to form a syndicate for the development of
the site. At the present moment someone with the complete “ know-how ” about
birds, preferably with some capital, is required. In the first place please write to : —
F. H. Charnley, Links Cottage, East Common, Harpenden, Hertfordshire.

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10-14
Macklin Street, London, W.C.2, to whom members should address all orders
for extra copies and back numbers. Subscription and back number orders from
non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., $6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wylceham
Press, 85 High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained, price 15s. each, postage extra. Alternatively the
printers can undertake the binding of complete current volumes (for which they
have binding cases in stock), price £2 per volume, postage extra. They can
also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for which
binding cases have to be specially made), price £2 10s., postage extra. Members
are requested to state whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be
bound with the volume.

NEW MEMBERS

The twenty-nine Candidates for Membership in the November-December 1969,
number of the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

AMENDED ADDRESSES

Philip E. B. Glasier, The Falconry Centre, Newent, Glos., GL18 IJJ.

Robert George MacGilchrist, 28 Haddon Street, Toronto 320, Canada.

Peter A. Pointer, Wildfowl Sanctuary, Creek End Farm, Top Barn Lane, South
Woodham Ferrers, Chelmsford, Essex.

Frans Vergeyen, Heidestraat 40, 9331 Appels, Belgium.

CHANGE OF NAME

Mrs. Eve Laidlay, to Mrs. G. St. G. Scho?*iberg.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

Sergio C. Alvear, 5866 W. 93rd Street, Apt. B., Los Angeles, California 90045,
U.S.A. Proposed by Arthur Douglas.

Dr. Jean-Pierre AndrIs, 9 Rue de Varsovie, 24-Perigueux, France. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

George W. Archibald, Crane Research Project, Laboratory of Ornithology,
159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14850,
U.S.A. Proposed by Miss P. Barclay-Smith.

Fred A. Barsch, 370 Glen Drive, Shirley, Long Island, New York 11967, U.S.A.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Mrs. Stephanie Belford, 24 Southway, Hampstead Garden Suburb, London,
N.W.n. Proposed by Major A. F. Appleton.

Frederick Holmes Charnley, a.s.v.a., Links Cottage, East Common, Harpenden,
Herts. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Mrs. Laurens Cook, Apple Street, Essex, Mass. 01929, U.S.A. Proposed by
Miss K. Bonner.

Leonard Rodney Dawson, Bishopthorpe Farm, Tetney, Nr. Grimsby, Lines.
Proposed by M. Kitching.

Walter L. Deierling, r.t.i., Box 438, Snohomish, Washington 98290, U.S.A.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Edm. De Winter, 109 Drabstreet, 2510 — Mortsel, Belgium. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

Stephen Andrew Duckett, i Holyoake Cottages, Little Alne, Wootton Wawen,
Solihull, Warwicks. Proposed by L. Peak.

Edward William Easter, 33 Elmhurst Road, Enfield, Middlesex. Proposed by

F. Meaden.

John A. Gwynne, Jr., 125 Williams Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02906,
U.S.A. Proposed by Charles Everitt.

Rex Harper, The Rosery, Bolingey, Perranporth, Cornwall. Proposed by Peter

G. Paris.

Hermann Heinzel, 53 Bonn, Adenouerallee 150-164, Germany. Proposed by
Peter G. Paris.

F. S. Hogg, Brentwood, 187 Newton Drive, Blackpool, Lancs. Proposed by J. C.
Barlass.

Lawrence Gordon Holloway, “ Grimsel ”, Barrack Lane, Aldwick, Bognor
Regis, Sussex. Proposed by John V. Tranter.

Lui T. Kinuya, 13526 Fenton Avenue, Sylmar, California 91342, U.S.A. Proposed
by Miss K. Bonner.

Lady Jean Lathbury, Lock’s House, Wokingham, Berkshire. Proposed by
F. W. Stoddart.

Mrs. Leila Winifred Leitch, “ Lindew Lodge ”, 6 St. Gregory’s Road, Stratford-
upon-Avon, Warwicks. Proposed by L. W. Hill.

M. J. Lindenberg, 9 Murray Street, Pittsworth 4356, Queensland, Australia.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Richard Meyers, 24218 Ward Street, Walteria, California 90505, U.S.A. Pro¬
posed by A. A. Prestwich.

Jack L. Parsons, 829 W. Washington, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103, U.S.A.
Proposed by Mrs. J. K. Parsons.

D. Grenville Roles, Les Augres Manor, Trinity, Jersey, Channel Islands.
Proposed by J. J. Mallet.

Richard C. Rye, 53a High Street, Buntingford, Herts. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

Roger J. Stanfield, c/o The Winged World, New Heysham Mead, Morecambe,
Lancs. Proposed by D. Coles.

Denis L. Stewart, 15 Broadwater Street, Point Clare, N.S.W. 2251, Australia.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Mrs. J. L. Woodhouse, 2626 Pheasant Drive, San Diego, California 92123, U.S.A.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

R. H. Carpenter, to 2938 Ashland, Detroit, Michigan 48215, U.S.A.

Armand Dossche, to Molenstraat 61, 9120 Destelbergen, O.VI, Belgium.
Ronald J. E. Horsham, to The Grange, 43 Bree Street, Cradock, Cape Province,
South Africa.

Dr. Jean-Marc Lernould, to Laboratoire de Primatologie et d’Ecologie Equa-
toriale, B.P. 18, Makokou, Gabon.

Mrs. Velma M. McDaniels, to Sparrow Hill, 8 Hopkins Road, R.F.D. 3, Ply¬
mouth, Mass. 02360, U.S.A.

Robin L. Restall, to Calle de Manuel Montilla 7, Colonia de Los Pinares, Madrid
16, Spain.

Paul E. Schneider, to 17 140 McAllister Street, Riverside, California 92503, U.S.A.
John K. Terres, to 345 East 57th Street, New York, N.Y. 10022, U.S.A.
Wing-Commander Hubert John West, to Cobbler’s Cottage, Lower Chedworth,
Nr. Cheltenham, Glos. 6L54 4AN.

DONATIONS
(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

A. Birtles
A. Bourke

Lt.-Col. H. W. Clayden
D. Goodwin

I. G. Hale

J. E. Hardy
J. M. S. Lax

W. K. Macey

Dr. E. P. McCabe, Jr.

Mrs. W. E. McGregor

N. O’Connor

E. B. Tanner

H. Tomblin

Captain H. Weston

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

£ Cf% >0-05

P\^4- .

AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

// u

**3 A

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 2
MARCH— APRIL

1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

The Elegant Bunting ( Emberiza elegans ), (with coloured plate), by Robin
L. Restall .

The Blue-winged Grass Parrakeet ( Neophema chrysostoma), by R. J. Hodges

Waterfowl Eggs, by S. T. Johnstone .......

Observations on Captive Tasmanian Native Hens and their Interaction
with Wild Moorhens, by D. T. Holyoak and Deirdre Sager

Nylon Netting, by T. S. Thomson .......

The Rufous-backed Shrike (Lanius schach ), (with plates), by M. D.
England . . .

A Dilute Form of the Key-West Quail Dove (with plates), by Donald G.
Hanover ...........

Hand-rearing and Observing Birds of Paradise (with plates), by H. Smyth

Brazilian Bird Collections, by J. Delacour ......

Breeding in Captivity by a One-year-old Snowy Owl, by E. Callegari

News and Views ..........

Reviews ............

Correspondence ..........

The Avicultural Society Receipts and Payments Account

66

67

7i

75

76

79

84

88

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, M.B.E., 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.
Assistant Editor: C« J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

Avicult. Mag.

Elegant Bunting

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 76. — No. 2. — All rights reserved. MARCH-APRIL 1970

THE ELEGANT BUNTING

( Emberiza elegans)

By Robin L. Restall (Madrid, Spain)

Some years ago I noticed an advertisement by Mr. C. Hill of Pinner in
Middlesex for “ Unidentified male Siberian buntings, five only, looks
like Shore Lark Nobody could blame Mr. Hill for not being able to
identify the species, for a friend of mine who is a professional ornithologist
and whom I regard as an expert, was unable to identify it on sight. Sub¬
sequent investigation on his part identified it as the Elegant Bunting
Emberiza elegans. I contacted Mr. Hill and discovered that he only had
one bird left, but I was fortunate to be able to obtain it. Mr. Hill was
very helpful and told me all he knew about the bird, including what he
was feeding it on, and we arranged for a mutually convenient transport
date.

Eventually the bird arrived. I was looking forward to seeing it very
much for of all the reference books I have the only one to mention the
species was Aviculture , which said of it: “ Said to be a favourite cage-bird
of the Japanese on account of its song and doubtless, also, of its charming
colouring (then followed a description). . . . This pretty bird breeds at
Ichang and Sechuen, is probably resident in Japan, visits Manchuria and
the valley or Amur in summer, and is a common winter visitor of China,
where it frequents the hillsides, bamboo clumps, and rough scrub around
farm clearings; its nesting-habits are probably similar to those of other
species of the genus ”.

More recently I have referred to the books by La Touche (1925),
Seebohm (1890) and the Caldwells (1931) to pull together notes on
distribution, local habitat and description of the races. I have not had
the opportunity of examining skins of the species, but have learned of the
areas from which those in the collection at the British Museum (Natural
History) have come, and these have been borne in mind. Yamashina’s
book on the birds of Japan only gives the barest reference, so I have not
used it. Mr. Allen Silver very kindly wrote to me on the subject as
follows “ . . . the Zoo had it previous to 1929 but have no account of it
since. Taka Tsukasa in Aviculture in Japan (see page 36) mentions it as
being kept among other buntings there. . . . These several buntings are
kept for their song, which like the quails kept in the past for their call, are
repetitious rather than musical to our ears

E

42

ROBIN L. RESTALL — THE ELEGANT BUNTING

The English names for the species are confusing, but Yellow-browed
and Yellow- throated Bunting are the commonest. I have chosen to call
it the Elegant Bunting, the name used by Mr. Silver, but one which he
thought particularly inappropriate. Personally, I find this bird extremely
attractive and elegant, and, in fact, one of the most appealing of all
buntings I have kept (Ember iza or Passerina).

As it is virtually unknown in this country I will describe it in some
detail. The adult male is about 6 in. long. Its forehead and crown,
sides of head, chin and a large crescent-shaped patch across the breast
are all black. The superciliary (eyebrow) and sides of the neck, back of
the crown and throat are bright yellow. The nape is black, while the lower
hind neck is grey, marked with black and chestnut. The feathers of the
crown are elongated into a half crest which can be erected at will. When
fully depressed, the yellow crescent immediately behind the crest is
covered by it. In winter the black head feathers are edged with brown
and the feathers of the hind neck are more noticeably streaked.

The back is chestnut, the rump is grey, and the upper tail coverts and
tail are greyish brown. The outer edges of the outer tail feathers are
white. The wings are mainly black, with pale chestnut edges. The tips
of the median and greater wing coverts are very pale buff, nearly white,
forming two broad wing bars. The innermost secondaries are black,
broadly edged with brown, while the secondaries and primaries are dark
brown edged with brown. Below, the bird is white, tinged with rufous
on the flanks which are also streaked with long chestnut stripes.

As the winter proceeds the brownish edges to the feathers of the head
and neck wear away and the bird looks sharply and more strongly
pencilled above.

The adult female is similar to the male, but differs in the following
respects : the black of the head in the male is brown in the female, the yellow
of the head is duller and less extensive, and only a tinge on the throat.
The breast crescent is reduced to vestigial traces, and in some individuals
is missing altogether. In the winter plumage the throat and upper parts
are more infused with brown or buff.

The edges to the feathers being broader the back looks browner. In
both sexes the iris is brown, the legs are flesh, and the bill is black in
summer and brown in winter, with paler lower mandible. Immature
birds resemble adult females but are possibly browner on the throat and
head.

It is a bird of great character, imparted largely by the head charac¬
teristics — the strong bandit’s mask and the stylish crest which is raised
and depressed at will. The only illustration I have found is a photo¬
graph of a male on the nest (Hanzak, 1967), but Mr. Silver’s encyclopaedic
knowledge wrote: “ . . . there is a figure of it in Jap. Aves, 1850, pi. 55,
by Temminck and Schlegel. The one I possess is that in Birds of Japan,
by Ksisuke Kobayashi, illustrated by Takashi Miyamato on plate 6

YeMmd

ROBIN L. RESTALL — THE ELEGANT BUNTING

43

44

ROBIN L. RESTALL — THE ELEGANT BUNTING

Races and Distribution

Professor Sushkin defined three races which are briefly as follows:

Emberiza elegans elegans (Temm.), which has been referred to elsewhere
as Temminck’s Yellow-browed Bunting. It is distinguished by having
strongly streaked flanks, black on chestnut. This is the northern race,
an uncommon resident in Japan and Manchuria, breeding in Amurskaya
(Amur or Amoor in the literature) and probably resident in Korea. It
winters in China wandering as far south as the Yangtse Kiang.

E. e. sibirica (Sushkin), sometimes called Sushkin’s Yellow- throated
Bunting is the Chinese race, ranging from Kiangsu southwards to Kwang-
tung (Hong Kong, to assist the reader in his geography). It is the least
strongly marked, being greyer on the nape and having the flanks scantily
marked with narrow streaks. It is the race in my plate.

E. e. elegantula (Swinhoe) is browner and darker above than either of
the others, and the flank stripes are very broad. It is the mountain race
ranging from Manchuria down to N.W. Fukien. It, too, breeds in the
northern parts and winters in the south.

Habitat and Habits

According to Hanzak its favourite haunts are young oak woods, but
the Caldwells are more helpful, saying it is found working on grassy
plots under certain hardwood trees, scratching under the leaves for buried
seeds. They say it is friendly and confiding being found usually in loose
colonies which permit a close approach for observation and study. All
that La Touche has to say on the subject is that it winters in south-eastern
Manchuria in sheltered woods and valleys, and Butler’s comments are
mentioned earlier above.

Unfortunately my bird had a broken wing, and so its behaviour could
hardly be termed normal. However, it was in excellent physical con¬
dition and certainly seemed full of bounce and energy. It was placed in a
roomy outdoor aviary (house n ft. x 9 ft., flight 11 ft. x 17 ft.) which is
planted with Cupressus, Finns and various other shrubs, including some
ground St. John’s Wort ( Hypericum calycinum) and a standard privet.
The bunting shared this enclosure with a pair of Rustic Buntings, Cali¬
fornia Quail, Mesias and a few other medium-sized birds. It settled in
immediately, and soon established two favourite spots, the first under a
small Lonicera nitida where it was perfectly hidden and from where it
could sally forth on food hunting forays. The second was in the heart of a
Cupressus where it roosted along with a few other birds. Naturally,
I suppose, it spent more time in company with the Rustic Buntings
(E. rustica) than any of the other species present. On many occasions, it
could be seen working over the grass looking for insects and other items,
the three birds forming a loose group. I never saw it doing this alone,
although it foraged through the undergrowth by itself (perhaps I should

ROBIN L. RESTALL - THE ELEGANT BUNTING

45

explain that the aviary is divided longitudinally, the front half being
“ lawn ” and the rear being shrubbery).

I put it outside at the end of the autumn, 1967, and there it stayed until
mid-March when it was given to Mr. Yealland at the Zoo. I always
throw a handful of mealworms around the aviary at feeding time, as this
prompts rather more natural behaviour than simply using pots on a shelf.
On several occasions, the bunting would dash out from beneath the
Lonicera and seize one, mumble it in its beak for a minute, and then run
back under cover. It never seemed to show the slightest sign of aggres¬
sion, although this could be explained by the fact that its injury must have
kept it below peak condition. It never sang either. The Pekins are said
to prize it as a songster (La Touche), and it is kept as a cage bird for this
reason. What its song is really like I cannot say, but there is no doubt
that Oriental ears like different sounds or qualities to western ones, and
several species that are kept as cage birds for their song could hardly
qualify in the west.

The crest is completely inconspicuous when depressed and runs down
into a black crescent on the nape; mostly, however, it is very slightly
raised giving an impression of slightly elongated feathers. Frequently
it is raised to the extent shown in my picture, and higher. Mr. Hill
made the following comment in a letter to me about them: “ . . . have
noticed they raise their crest when aggressive and trill like a waxwing, but
their alarm note is just like a Yellowhammer’s ”. It seemed to me that
the crest was raised whenever the bird was excited, be it alarm, curiosity
or what.

Food

The natural food must be described as various small seeds and insects,
the callow young being fed entirely on insect life, which is predictable
and not very helpful. Most avicultural text books suggest “ canary seed,
millets, oats and hemp ” for buntings en masse, but the bill of the elegant
is fine and light and seems inadequate to deal with dry hemp and oats.
Mr. Silver kindly gave me a reference for an article in the Avicultural
Magazine (3rd series, Volume XIII, 1922) by Taka Tsukasa which
apparently describes how the Japanese feed their buntings on soft food.
Unfortunately, I do not have this so cannot give details here. My
Elegant Bunting had access to canary mixture, mixed millets, Haith’s
English Weed seeds mixture, and Sluis Universal grade Softfood. The
latter was placed in a bowl on the floor and was only taken in small
quantities; of the former it is impossible to say what was taken or what
the preferences were. Mealworms and maggots were both taken eagerly.
Mr. Hill told me that he had kept them on plain canary, mixed millets,
maggots, mealworms and softbill food.

46

ROBIN L. RESTALL — THE ELEGANT BUNTING

Nesting

Although there are large gaps in my study of the literature, it seems as
though the species has not been bred in captivity, at least in Britain. It is
a ground nester, and so would not require any special pans or receptacles,
but clearly would require suitable cover. The nest is built of soft bents,
fine stems, etc., and is always on the ground beneath an overhanging
stone, fallen log, over- arching root, etc., amongst bracken, brushwood,
or other tangled undergrowth, or Skylark-fashion, beneath a clump of
grass. The clutch is normally four or five and they are dirty white with
pale violet markings and dark brown spots. According to Hanzak they
are double brooded.

Summary

To the contemporary aviculturist, this is an unknown species and there
is virtually no mention of it in the available literature It is a lovely
member of the Emberiza genus and would, no doubt, repay study, although
it would appear to be fairly typical in most respects. It is hoped that
these notes will prompt any other members who have experience of the
species to contribute to the common wealth.

REFERENCES

Caldwell and Caldwell. 1931. South China Birds. Shanghai.

Hanzak, J. 1967. The Pictorial Encyclopaedia of Birds. London.

La Touche, J. D. D. 1925. Handbook of the Birds of Eastern China, Vol. 1.
London.

Seebohm, H. 1890, Birds of the Japanese Empire, Zool. Soc. Bond. London.

J. R. HODGES - THE BLUE- WINGED GRASS PARRAKEET

47

THE BLUE-WINGED GRASS PARRAKEET

( Neophema chrysostoma )

By J. R. Hodges (Pinner, Middlesex, England)

There can be no more satisfying branch of aviculture than that devoted
to the establishment of aviary bred strains of various species. Several
members of the Avicultural Society have succeeded in breeding many
species to several successive generations but unfortunately their experi¬
ences (except those of Nicholson with Red Headed Parrot Finches and
Teague with Gouldian Finches) have seldom been documented. The
almost complete ban on the export of native fauna imposed by the
Australian authorities has provided a great incentive to establish aviary
strains of the many attractive Australian species. Fortunately, most
Australian Parrakeets and Finches do well in captivity and can be induced
to breed. Australian parrakeets make ideal aviary inhabitants and to me
the most desirable of them are the Grass Parrakeets. The members of
this genus [Neophema) have every conceivable advantage from the avi¬
cultural point of view. They are extremely beautiful, they often become
tame and confiding, they are hardy and they are not difficult to maintain
and breed. Two further advantages which they possess of particular
interest to those of us who are compelled to live in towns and suburbs are
that they require only small aviaries and are not noisy. They are not as
widely kept as they deserve to be and I have often wondered whether their
comparative lack of popularity is due to the pessimistic accounts which
the avicultural writers of the 1930’s gave of the ease with which they were
supposed to die from all sorts of diseases with almost meaningless names
like contagious conjunctivitis and septicaemia. Many of these authors
were repeating the gloomy prognostications of the late Duke of Bedford
whose lack of success with the Grass Parrakeets was probably due to the
fact that he kept them in unsuitably large aviaries in which they were
inclined to panic and dash headlong against the wire netting with fatal
results. In any case, he was often inclined to make sweeping generaliza¬
tions about a particular species or genus on the basis of a limited experience
with only a few specimens.

Since 1956, I have kept several pairs of six of the seven species of the
genus. Last year I saw for the first time the other (the Orange Bellied)
in one British aviary and in several South Australian aviaries. The
Splendid ( N . splendida ) is probably the favourite of most Grass Parrakeet
enthusiasts but, attractive as it is, I do not think it can compare with the
Blue-winged Grass Parrakeet (N. chrysostoma ). My first pair of Blue-
wings were obtained more than 10 years ago. At first they lived up to
their reputation of being difficult to persuade to breed, but gradually
they began to produce a few youngsters and I was able to build up a small
stock. In 1964 I obtained a few imported Australian aviary bred

48

J. R. HODGES - THE BLUE- WINGED GRASS PARRAKEET

specimens and although for a while the breeding results continued to be
disappointing, they gradually improved and during 1967, 1968 and 1969
three or four breeding pairs have produced more than 20 youngsters per
year. Breeding pairs have been made up only from the best unrelated
youngsters and, as a result, I have been able to develop a breeding strain
of prolific, large, well-coloured specimens.

The natural habitat of the Blue- wing is Tasmania and coastal areas of
Victoria and South Australia. It is reputed to be the most common
parrot in Tasmania and, for this reason, I was very disappointed at not
seeing any in the wild during a very brief visit to Hobart and its lovely
surrounding countryside in October 1969. However, I was compensated
for the dearth of Blue-wings in the places I visited by the sight of large
numbers of Tasmanian or Green Rosellas ( Platycercus caledonicus) many
of which came to feed on the ground within a few yards of where I stood
at Port Arthur. Many Blue-wings migrate from their breeding grounds
in Tasmania to Victoria and South Australia when the weather con¬
ditions become less favourable and the food supplies scarce. Melbourne
aviculturists often find large numbers of Blue-wings around their aviaries
at certain times of the year. These are birds on their migratory passage
which are attracted by the calls of the aviary inmates.

Several of the Australian aviculturists I visited recently keep Blue¬
winged Parrakeets which, even in their native habitat, have the reputation
of not being very free breeders in captivity. However, at the Melbourne
Zoo, which possesses one particularly attractive exhibit in the form of an
extremely well designed range of breeding aviaries for rare parrakeets, the
species appears to flourish and one compartment of the range contained
at the time of my visit 30 to 40 Blue-wings, all apparently bred at the
Zoo.

The Blue-winged is one of the largest of the Grass Parrakeets and is
about eight and a half inches long. The adult male is olive green on the
back, pale green on the throat and chest and yellow on the abdomen and
the underside of the tail. The wings are deep royal blue as also is the
frontal band and the dorsal side of the tail. The lores and the areas
around the eyes are bright yellow. The primaries are black, the bill is
almost black and the legs are grey. The female is said to differ from the
male in being duller coloured generally. However, individual specimens
vary considerably in brightness of colour and the only reliable guide to
sex in adults is the jet black of the primaries of the male which contrasts
with the brownish black of the female. One of the most attractive
features of the Blue-wing is the large round button-like eyes which give it a
very bright and intelligent look. It is easy to confuse immature specimens
with young Elegant Parrakeets ( N . elegans) but in the adults the differences
are very noticeable. Elegants are distinctly more slender, the green
plumage has a more golden yellow hue and the frontal band extends
behind the eye. The Blue-wing is more olive green and the frontal band is

J. R. HODGES — THE BLUE- WINGED GRASS PARRAKEET

49

less extensive. However, the greatest differences are in the blue wing
patches which are much more extensive in the Blue-wing and of a deeper
blue. Much of this blue is hidden by the wing coverts when the bird is
in repose but when it is fully exposed, as for example in display, the Blue¬
winged Parrakeet is quite incredibly beautiful.

In the wild Blue-wings feed on the seeds of grasses and herbaceous
plants, fruits, berries and small insects. In captivity they do well on the
usual diet recommended for Grass Parrakeets. Mine are fed on a mixture
containing approximately 50% canary seed, 40% mixed millets, 6% white
sunflower, 3% small striped sunflower and 1% hemp. They are given
fresh green food in the form of spinach beet, groundsel, chickweed or
dandelion, and slices of apple as frequently as possible. They receive
millet sprays dusted with P.Y.M. (Phillips yeast mixture) and Haiths
Budgerigar Tonic seed at least twice a week. They have constant access to
fresh water, mineralized grit and fresh cuttlefish. The water is supplied
in a bowl about 8 in. in diameter and 1 in. deep in the open flight and the
seed in a similar smaller container in the aviary shelter.

The aviary for a pair of Grass Parrakeets should consist of an enclosed
shelter, a covered flight and an open flight. The shelter should be well
lit and have perches or ledges higher than anywhere else in the aviary to
encourage the birds to roost in it at night rather than in the flight. Grass
Parrakeets appear to fare better in small aviaries than in excessively large
ones. A satisfactory size for a breeding pair is 9 ft. x 2 ft. 6 in. x 6 ft. high.
Mine are of these dimensions and are arranged in a series of compart¬
ments. Probably the optimum size is larger and a length of about 12 ft. is
desirable. My aviaries are smaller because I live in a London suburb
where garden aviary space is severely limited. In very long aviaries
Grass Parrakeets are inclined to take fright at night and to hit the far
end of the aviary with literally break neck speed. Grass floors are best
in the open flight but they quickly become unsightly mud patches in
small enclosures. The floors of my aviary flights consist of 2 ft. x 2 ft.
frames covered with \ in. mesh wire netting laid on the earth and covered
with sand to a depth of about J in. The sand beneath the perches is
removed and replenished frequently. In such enclosures with sand floors
it is probably beneficial for the birds to have fresh turves placed on the
ground from time to time. The perches in my aviaries consist usually of
apple tree branches and these are replaced about twice a year.

Blue-winged Grass Parrakeets will take to almost any kind of nest box.
I use the vertical type 18 in. x 6 in. x 6 in. with an entrance hole z\ in.
in diameter near the top and a wire netting ladder tacked inside. They
are made from timber f in. thick treated with creosote. About 2 in. of
moist peat pressed well down is placed in the bottoms of the boxes and
they are hung in the aviary flights at the end of March. The birds
almost invariably show an immediate interest in the nest boxes and the
hens usually spend long periods scratching about in the peat preparing the

50

J. R. HODGES - THE BLUE- WINGED GRASS PARRAKEET

nest. Laying hardly ever commences much before the end of April. In
this respect Blue- wings are very dilferent from Splendids and Turquoisines
which often start laying a week or so after the nest boxes have been placed
in position. I have very frequently had cases of egg binding with
Splendids and Turquoisines but never with Blue- wings. They usually
lay from four to six eggs on alternate days and commence incubation after
the appearance of the second egg. The chicks hatch after 1 8 to 20 days
and at first they are covered with grey down. They are brooded very
closely by the hen for the first few days and during this period she leaves
the nest only very infrequently and is fed by the cock in the nest box
entrance hole. When the young are about 10 days old she leaves them
for longer periods and the cock often begins to enter the box to feed the
chicks. Most of my hens brood their chicks at night for at least three
weeks. The chicks can be seen calling for food at the entrance holes
when they are about 30 days old and soon afterwards they leave the
nest boxes. They are a little timid at first but usually settle down and are
flying and perching confidently within a day or so. They are dull
imitations of the parents with horn coloured beaks which change to black
in two or three months. The hens frequently commence to lay a second
clutch of eggs before all the young from the first nest have left the nest
box but the cock will continue to feed the chicks which usually become
independent within a week of leaving the nest. The youngsters can be
left with the parents without coming to any harm but I usually remove
those from the first nest before the chicks from the second are
flying. Young birds are not difficult to sex at first because the males
have brighter blue wing patches than the females but this difference
becomes less apparent in a month or two after which it is no longer possible
to sex them until they have completed their first moult. This usually
takes place when they are about eight months old.

Fully mature specimens are almost invariably double brooded. Early
hatched youngsters usually have one nest during the following year but
those hatched later (second “ round ”) hardly ever attempt to breed until
their second season. Blue- wings have no special extra requirements when
they are breeding but they should have constant access to supplies of fresh
green food, soaked millet sprays and additional hempseed.

Occasionally a hen is inclined to lay again long before her first brood
has been reared, and deserts it. Hand-rearing of the chicks is very
easy particularly if they are not less than about 10 days old. They should
be placed in a small box with the bottom covered with plenty of peat to
absorb the excreta and kept in a fairly warm place. Many different diets
are suitable. I usually stir four teaspoonfuls of “ Farex ”, one teaspoonful
of “ Ostermilk ” and a drop of “ Haliborange ” with boiling water to
make a sloppy mixture which can be fed to the chicks with an eye dropper.
After a little practice the technique of administering the food straight
into the crop becomes very simple. Birds more than 10 days old need

J. R. HODGES — THE BLUE- WINGED GRASS PARRAICEET

51

feeding every four hours or so and the amount of food given should be
gauged so that the crop is not quite empty when the time comes for the
next feed. When they are about four weeks old the youngsters begin to
exercise their wings and to take short flights when they are waiting for
their turn to be fed. At this stage they should be transferred to an
ordinary box cage with the floor covered with grit, canary seed and millet
sprays. They very quickly learn to shell seed and show their indepen¬
dence by refusing further hand feeding. Hand-reared birds make good
specimens and, contrary to popular belief, excellent parents.

In my experience Blue-wings are the most robust of the Grass Parra-
keets. Mine are kept outdoors in unheated aviaries all the year round
and are never locked in their shelters at night. During cold damp
weather I have occasionally found an odd bird looking unwell, producing
green, very liquid excreta, suffering from enteritis. Such patients respond
miraculously to heat. They should be transferred to a hospital cage and
kept on a plain seed diet at a temperature of 85 °F. until the excreta becomes
normal. The temperature may then be gradually reduced over a period
of one or two days. They can safely be transferred to the outdoor aviary
again when the weather conditions are favourable. Although I have lost
several Splendid Parrakeets from the same range of aviaries as the Blue-
wings from infestation with Ascaridia, I have only once discovered the
presence of round worms in the intestine of a dead Blue-wing. However,
it is dangerous to be complacent about this avicultural scourge and I
believe that all parrakeet breeders should use one of the non-toxic
anthelminthics such as Tetramisole (Nilverm, I.C.I.) prophylactically at
least. But our knowledge of diseases in birds is very limited indeed and
probably the only really effective form of treatment for most bird ailments
is heat. I think it is significant that I have had to use a hospital cage
considerably less frequently for the Blue- wings than for any other species
of parrakeet which I have kept.

Until comparatively recently Blue-winged Grass Parrakeets were rare
and expensive in Europe. Like Splendids, Turquoisines and Elegants
they have almost suddenly become readily available in this country
mainly because of the importation of large numbers of Continental bred
specimens. Many of these are bred in cages and indoor aviaries. They
are not as robust as outdoor bred specimens as many purchasers have
found to their cost. Some of this continental bred stock is giving the
Grass Parrakeets again a reputation quite undeserved, for being delicate.
Outdoor aviary bred stock is certainly not. Keeping and breeding the
members of the genus Neophema , particularly the Blue-winged Grass
Parrakeet, has given me a great deal of interest and pleasure for more than
a decade. Now that aviary bred strains are well established I am sure
they will give as much pleasure to many others.

52

S. P. JOHNSTONE — WATERFOWL EGGS

WATERFOWL EGGS

By S. T. Johnstone (The Wildfowl Trust, Slimbridge,
Gloucestershire, England)

Egg identification in the Anatidae is extremely difficult, not only within
the family and tribes, but also within a species itself where considerable
variation can be found in colour, size and shape.

The Magpie Goose lays a large white egg, the shell of which is thick
and pitted. The Whistling Ducks all have white thick-shelled eggs of
characteristic shape. Among the swans, the Mute and Black lay green
eggs, the rest of the forms large white ones of similar size and shape and
shell texture. The exception is the Coscoroba, which of course is
considerably smaller.

All the Grey geese produce white eggs which apart from the Greylag
vary little in size. Even the Lesser Whitefront lays a comparative large
egg for the bird.

Among the Black geese, in the numerous races of Canada Goose, they
are white and of similar shape, varying in size from maxima to minima.
The Barnacle and Ne-ne eggs are indistinguishable from most of those
of the Canadas. The Brents are smaller, as indeed are Red-breasted
Goose eggs, which are also cream in colour.

The Sheldgeese and duck eggs remain fairly consistent in colour and
size according to the species. They mostly have thin creamy coloured
shells.

In the duck world is the greatest variation. Colour changes from the
deep brown of the White-backed Duck through various shades of stone,
buff, cream and green to the beautiful eau-de-nil eggs of the Barrow’s
Goldeneye.

Size differs from the goose sized eggs of the Steamer Ducks and
Eiders to those of the Hottentot Teal. Difference in the size and colour
in a particular species of duck has been most noticeable with the Shoveler,
Gadwall and Wigeon.

The following chart gives details of all forms of waterfowl eggs that
have been available at Slimbridge. In most cases a large number of eggs
has been examined, in a few instances only a single clutch has been
measured.

WATERFOWL EGGS

Incuba¬

tion

Species

Size

(mm)

Colour

Nature
of shell

Clutch

number

period

(days)

Magpie Geese

8ox 54

Glossy white

Thick and
pitted

6-10

28 ;

Spotted Whistling Ducks
Eyton’s Whistling Ducks

52 x 38

White

Thin

8-12

31

48x37

White

Thick

10-12

30

S. P. JOHNSTONE — WATERFOWL EGGS

53

Species

Waterfowl Eggs —continued

Size Colour Nature

Clutch

Incuba¬

tion

period

Wandering Whistling
Ducks

(mm)

Si x 35

White

of shell

Thick

number

8-15

(days)

30

Fulvous Whistling Ducks

53x38

White

Thick

8-16

28

Cuban Whistling Ducks

55 X40

White

Thick

6-10

30

Javan Whistling Ducks

47x38

White

Opaque

6-8

28

White-faced Whistling
Ducks

47X37

White

Opaque

10-16

28

Red-billed Whistling
Ducks

50x39

White

Thick

10-18

28

Coscoroba Swan

91 x 63

Whitish cream

Thin

6-8

35

Black Swan

115x65

Pale Green

Thick

4-6

36

Mute Swan

115x75

Greenish blue

Thick

4-8

37

Black-necked Swan

105 X 65

Cream

Thick

4-7

36

Whooper Swan

113x73

White

Thick

4-7

36

Trumpeter Swan
Bewick’s Swan

1 18 x 76

White

Thick

4-6

33

1 18 x 82

White

Thick

3-5

30

Whistling Swan

110x73

White

Thick

4-7

36

Swan Goose

82 x 56

White

Normal

6-10

28

Greylag

85 X 58

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

28

Whitefront

76 X 54

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

26

Lesser Whitefront

76x49

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

25

Western Bean

83 x 60

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

28

Russian Bean

84x55

White

thickness

Normal

4-6

28

Pinkfoot

78 x 52

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

28

Snow Geese

78 x 52

White

thickness

Normal

4-7

25

Ross’s Goose

70x47

Pink on laying

thickness

Normal

3-6

23

Emperor Goose

76 X 52

fades to white
White

thickness

Normal

4“7

25

Bar-headed Goose

82x55

White

thickness

Normal

4-10

28

Ne-ne/Hawaiian Goose

82 x 65

White

thickness

Normal

3-6

29

Red-breasted Goose

71 x 48

Cream

thickness

Normal

4“9

25

Black Brant Goose

70X 50

White

thickness

Normal

3-6

22

Light-bellied Brent

75 X47

White

thickness

Normal

3

_

Giant Canada

86 x 52

White

thickness
. Normal

4-10

28

Atlantic Canada

86 x 52

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

28

Moffit’s Canada

86 x 52

White

thickness

Normal

4-6

28

Taverner’s Canada

80 x 50

White

thickness

Normal

4-8

28

Vancouver Canada

85 x 51

White

thickness

Normal

4-6

28

Dusky Canada

80 x 52

White

thickness

Normal

4-6

28

thickness

54 S. P. JOHNSTONE — WATERFOWL EGGS

Waterfowl Eggs — continued Incuba¬

tion

Species

Size

(mm)

Colour

Clutch
of shell

Clutch

number

period

(days)

Cackling Goose

72 x 48

White

Normal

thickness

4-9

28

Barnacle Goose

76x50

White

Normal

thickness

4-9

28

Cereopsis

78x55

White

Normal

thickness

4-6

35

Andean Goose

75X50

Cream

Normal

thickness

5-10

30

Ashy-headed Goose

70 x 50

Pale buff

Normal

thickness

6-8

30

Ruddy-headed Goose

65 X48

Deep cream

Normal

thickness

4-6

30

Magellan Goose

74x50

Cream

Normal

thickness

4-9

30

Kelp Goose

73 X53

Deep cream

Normal

thickness

4-6

32

Abyssinian Blue-winged
Goose

70 x 50

Cream

Normal

thickness

6-9

3i

Orinoco Goose

60 x 44

White

Thick

6-12

30

Egyptian Goose

68 x 50

Creamy white

Translucent

8-12

30

Shelducks

70 x 50

Creamish

Translucent

8-14

30

Radjah Shelduck

60 x 42

White

Normal

6-8

30

Crested Ducks

63 X46

Deep cream

Normal

4-6

30

Bronze-wing Duck

70 x 51

Deep cream

Normal

4-6

30

African Black Duck

62 X43

Deep cream

Normal

4-8

28

Mallard

58 x 40

White, green or
pale buff

Normal

10-20

26

Hawaiian Duck

55 X38

Greyish white

Thin

4-8

26

Laysan Teal

58x33

Greenish

Thin

4-8

26

Florida Duck

North American

57x38

Whitish cream

Normal

6-12

26

Black Duck

58 x 40

Greenish

Normal

6-12

26

Indian Spotbill

54x41

White

Thick

6-10

26

Chinese Spotbill

58x40

Creamish white

Normal

8-12

26

Grey Ducks

52 X42

Greenish white

Normal

8-16

26

Philippine Duck

54x41

Pale green

Thin

8-14

26

Yellowbill Ducks

56 x 41

Buff

Normal

6-10

27

Australian Grey Teal

49x36

Creamy white

Normal

8-12

25

Chestnut-breasted Teal
New Zealand Brown

51 X37

Deep cream

Normal

8-12

26

Duck

58 X42

Deep cream

Normal

6-8

28

Marbled Teal

46 X 32

Cream

Normal

8-12

25

Cape Teal

50 X 34

Deep cream

Normal

8-10

25

Hottentot Teal

43 x 33

Cream

Normal

6-8

24

Versicolor Teal

45 x 35

Cream

Normal

6-12

25

Puna Teal

58x44

Deep cream

Normal

4-6

26

Green-winged Teal

45 x33

Bullish

Normal

6-12

24

Red-billed Pintail

54 x 38

Cream

Normal

6-10

25

Bahama Pintail

52x38

Cream

Normal

6-10

25

Chilean Pintail

52 X40

Cream

Normal

6-12

25

Kerguelen Pintail

52 x 30

Creamish white

Normal

6-8

25

Chilean Pintail

56 X40

Cream

Normal

6-12

26

Baikal Teal

48 x 35

Greenish

Normal

6-8

25

Chilean Teal

54 x 38

Cream

Normal

6-8

24

Sharp-wing Teal

52 x 36

Creamy white

Normal

4-8

24

Gadwall

54x36

Deep cream

Normal

6-15

26

S. P. JOHNSTONE — WATERFOWL EGGS 55

Waterfowl Eggs — continued Incuba¬

tion

Species

Size

(mm)

Colour

Nature
of shell

Clutch

number

period

(days)

Falcated Duck

56 x 40

Creamish

Thin

6-10

25

European Wigeon

54X35

Cream

Normal

4-10

25

American Wigeon

S4X35

Cream

Normal

6-10

24

Chiloe Wigeon

58 x 40

Pale buff

Normal

6-8

26

Blue-winged Teal

46 x 33

Cream

Normal

8-12

24

Cinnamon Teal

48x35

Pale cream

Normal

8-12

24

Garganey

45 X33

Pale buff

Normal

6-10

23

Argentine Shoveler

52X 36

Cream

Normal

6-8

25

Cape Shoveler

54x36

Cream

Normal

6-8

26

New Zealand Shoveler

55 x 38

Greenish

Normal

6-10

26

Common Shoveler

55 X37

Greenish

Normal

6-12

26

Ringed Teal

45 X36

White

Translucent

6-12

23

Salvador’s Duck

55 X42

Creamy

Normal

6-8

Common Eider

77 x 50

Olive green

Normal

4-6

24

King Eider

64x43

Bright olive

Normal

5“7

22

Spectacled Eider

64x45

Olive

Normal

5-7

24

Red-crested Pochard

54x42

Greenish or
stone

Normal

6-16

28

Rosybill

56 X42

Green, cream

Normal

6-12

28

Southern Pochard

54X44

Creamy white

Thickish

4-8

26

Canvasback

63 X45

Bright olive

Normal

4-8

26

Common Pochard

62 x 44

Olive

Normal

4-8

27

Redhead

62 x 44

White or stone

Normal

8-14

28

Baer’s Pochard

51 X 38

Cream

Normal

6-9

27

Common White-eye

50x37

Deep cream

Normal

6-10

26

Australian White-eye

54x42

Pale cream

Normal

8-12

26

Tufted Duck

58x41

Brownish olive

Normal

6-10

25

Ring-necked Duck

58 X4I

Cream

Normal

6-8

26

New Zealand Scaup

64 X 41

Cream

Normal

6-8

26

Lesser Scaup

56x40

Stone or olive

Normal

6-10

27

Greater Scaup

62 X 40

Brown or olive

Normal

6-8

27

Brazilian Teal

49x35

Pale cream

Normal

6-8

25

Mandarin

49 x 36

Whitish cream

Translucent

8-12

32

Carolina

52 x 40

Whitish

Translucent

8-16

32

Maned Goose

54x42

Creamy

Normal

8-10

30

Spurwinged Goose

77X57

White

Thin

6-8

Comb Duck

56 X 42

Creamy

Translucent

8-12

30

Hartlaub’s Duck

55 X42

Cream

Thin

8-10

32

Common Scoter

65 X44

Cream

Normal

6-8

28

Velvet Scoter

71 x 48

Deep cream

Normal

6-8

28

Harlequin Duck

54 x 38

Cream

Thinnish

6-8

30

Longtailed Duck

53 X48

Stone or pale
olive

Normal

6-12

23

Barrow’s Goldeneye

62 x 45

Blue green

Normal

6-10

30

Common Goldeneye

60 x 42

Green

Normal

6-10

28

Goosander

66 x 46

Cream

Translucent

8-12

30

Red-breasted Merganser

63 X45

Deep buff

Opaque

8-10

30

Smew

52x38

White

Translucent

6-8

28

Hooded Merganser

52x47

White

Opaque

8-10

28

Ruddy Duck

64 x 46

White

Thick

6-14

24

Maccoa Duck

78 X 55

White bluish

Thick

6-8

24

White-backed Duck
Falkland Isle Flightless

68 x 48

Rich brown

Thick

5-7

26

Steamer Duck

84 x 56

Cream

Normal

5-6

30

Black-headed Duck

60 x 40

Creamy white

Thick

26

D. T. HOLYOAK AND MISS D. M. SAGER — OBSERVATIONS

56

OBSERVATIONS ON

CAPTIVE TASMANIAN NATIVE HENS & THEIR
INTERACTIONS WITH WILD MOORHENS

By D. T. Holyoak and Deirdre Sager (London, England)

Ridpath (1964 and unpublished) has made extensive behaviour studies
on the Tasmanian Native Hen ( Tribonyx mortieri) in Tasmania. This note
records observations on the interactions of a single captive pair of Native
Hens with several pairs of wild Moorhens ( Gallinula chloropus ) at the
London Zoo. The Native Hen is a flightless, chicken-sized rail with dull
olive-green plumage relieved only by a white streak on each flank. This
species is restricted to Tasmania; an area from which moorhens of the
genus Gallinula are absent.

At the London Zoo the pair of Native Hens are kept on the “ Three
Islands Pond ” ; they roam freely about the pond area and the surrounding
lawns and flower beds, normally walking, but sometimes swimming
buoyantly or running. They have succeeded in rearing only one chick
so far, although they made several nesting attempts in 1969. Two or
three pairs of wild Moorhens breed on the pond, taking advantage of the
food provided for pinioned ducks and geese. The Moorhens raise several
broods of young each year.

The Native Hens defend land territories from the Moorhens, partly by
chasing them, and partly by giving loud, harsh, two-syllabled aggressive
calls; this call is a duet, the female providing a lower-pitched note than the
male (this “ duetting ” was first noted by Ridpath 1964). Probably
because of aggression from the Native Hens, the Moorhens defend only
water territories from other Moorhen pairs. The Moorhens regularly
give their turning away territorial display showing off the white under-tail
coverts, both to other Moorhens and to the Native Hens, although the
Native Hens enter the water freely when moving between the islands in
the pond. This division of the pond area into land territories for the
Native Hens, and water territories for the Moorhens is very clearly
marked. Often a Native Hen will run ten yards to chase a Moorhen into
the water, then ignore it even though it is swimming only two or three feet
away with the white under-tail coverts fluffed. Because of this, the
Native Hens are defending three islands and parts of the land surrounding
the pond from Moorhens, but within this area two or three pairs of Moor¬
hens are defending water territories between themselves.

In June 1968 three Moorhen chicks a day or two old (smaller than a
chicken’s egg) were watched as they were fed first on land by the pair of
Native Hens, then in the water by a pair of Moorhens which we assumed
to be their parents. Both pairs of birds showed considerable interest in
the chicks, although the chicks appeared to be more strongly attracted to

D. T. HOLYOAK AND MISS D. M. SAGER — OBSERVATIONS

57

the Moorhens. The chicks seemed to be reluctant to enter the water,
and the Moorhens were unable to visit the chicks freely on land because
of aggression from the Native Hens. During one two-hour period of
watching, the chicks were fed several dozen times by both the Moorhens
and the Native Hens. On land both species fed the chicks on small
pieces bitten from grass leaves; in the water the Moorhens picked tiny
objects (possibly insects) from the water surface.

The Moorhens made frequent attempts to approach the chicks when
they were on land, but they were usually driven back into the water by one
or other of the Native Hens. However, the Moorhens reached the
chicks a number of times, and each time the behaviour of the Native Hens
towards the Moorhens was completely different when the Moorhens were
either feeding the chicks or very close to them. Instead of chasing the
Moorhens away, the Native Hens maintained a passive indifference a few
feet away. Nevertheless, as soon as the Moorhen moved more than a few
feet away from the chicks it would be chased back into the water and
sometimes savagely pecked.

This “ cutting off ” of the aggression from the Native Hens when the
Moorhens managed to approach the chicks closely was striking. Two
explanations of the behaviour seem reasonable; first aggression near the
chicks may be greatly reduced because of the danger of causing injury to
the chicks in birds which are as aggressive as rails (the danger of injury
might be mainly from redirected aggression; the selective value of
reducing this near to chicks could be greater than that involved in reducing
the risk of accidental injuries), and secondly (as suggested to us by Derek
Goodwin) in natural situations there may be little point in attacking a
strange bird when it has reached chicks, as its ability to eat them would
then seem to be assured ; attacking the predator at this stage might be dis¬
advantageous because of the risk of injury to the adult birds. Derek
Goodwin has seen analogous behaviour in Song Thrushes, Turdus
philomelos, whose nest was being robbed by a Jay, Garrulus glandarius.
Here, the cutting off of aggression can probably best be explained by the
second of the two alternatives mentioned above.

We are grateful to Peter Olney for help in studying birds at the Regent’s
Park Zoo, and to Derek Goodwin for helpful suggestions and encourage¬
ment.

REFERENCE

Ridpath, M. G. 1964. The Tasmanian Native Hen. Australian Nat. Hist.,
I4* 346-3SO.

# #

*

F

T. S. THOMSON — NYLON NETTING

58

NYLON NETTING

By T. S. Thomson (Hoole, Cheshire, England)

Visitors to my aviary frequently express interest in the use of nylon
netting. On the other hand the material is occasionally condemned by a
few who may have used it under unfavourable conditions. While nylon
netting is no substitute for wire netting, it has its use in aviculture. Where
quail, partridge and pheasant stock is housed, nylon covered enclosures
minimize head injuries which may occur when birds suddenly rise up in
flight. Young waterfowl and pheasants can be protected from winged
predators by temporarily covering their open pens with netting. Here
it is also used to cover extensive enclosures in which various research
projects are undertaken. Normal practice is to cover an enclosure for
9 months of the year, removing the netting for the winter.

Nylon netting, being so light in weight, can be used to cover very large
areas by the use of a few cross wires. It is not subject to temperature
changes 01 frost, but like all other synthetic netting is liable to damage
from the ultra-violet rays of the sun, and for this reason it is necessary to
treat it every year or so. It is quite a simple process to bundle the netting
in a bale by tying it up with twine, the neater the mass is compacted the
easier the next stage, which is simply dipping it in whatever preparation
is being used. The net-makers recommend black tar or bitumen.
A creosote and bitumen mixture acts very well. This dipping process
can be carried out in a bath, drum or any handy container, the treated
netting being left to become drip dry. The object of such treatment is to
dye the netting a dark colour, this being necessary when it is being used
out of doors.

The breaking strains of the twines from which the nylon netting is
made are very high. The netting is sold in several grades, according to
the number of twines used. Complete nets of any size are made to mea¬
sure, where rectangular measurements are given. There is a wide range of
mesh sizes and the netting sets squarely without any stretching. It is an
advantage to have the netting corded on all sides at an extra cost of a
few pence. All twine nettings are subject to abrasion and although nylon
is very strong it will gradually rub through on wires or other supports
if there is any undue movement. It is therefore very necessary to see
that the nets are securely tied down in order to prevent as much move¬
ment as possible. This has not always been carried out here and nets
have suffered by the wind creating a continuous rippling wave action,
resulting in netting fatigue, especially at the edges where it was secured.

One system tried out here could be called the suspension method.
Wires were strung across a 60 ft. x 60 ft. unit at about 3 ft. intervals from
north to south and east to west, giving a criss-cross pattern. Ex W.D.
telephone wire was used. The netting was laid on top and secured

T. S. THOMSON — NYLON NETTING

59

around the sides by using 3 ft. long, 1 in. x J in. strips of wood nailed to
the surrounding framework. Wires were strung from the apex of an
adjacent roof running parallel to one side of the unit and across to the
other side (see sketch). Ties from the suspension wires were made to
the criss-cross wires on which the net lay. It was thus possible to suspend
the complete net from above, the absence of ground supports being desir¬
able since mechanical cultivators were used to till the soil. While this
method proved satisfactory it took some time to set up and there was
trouble removing the net, there being so many ties to undo. Also there
was some chafing of the netting where the vertical ties made contact.
The following season one central pole, placed in a few minutes, did away
with the suspension idea. Where one central pole is used it is necessary
to fix the cross wires which come in contact with it underneath all other
wires in order that all other wires are raised when the pole is placed in
position.

Rats occasionally try to establish themselves in the area and can be
very destructive to nylon netting. The pests run up the surrounding
woodwork, bite a hole in the netting and gain access to the aviary. Fre¬
quent visits results in the netting being destroyed. To overcome this a
perimeter of wire netting was fixed around all sides of the aviary. The
perimeter is a 1-3 ft. width of wire netting forming the edge of the aviary
roof and attached to the top edge of the side walls, projecting inwards and
suppoited below by horizontal or slanting wood supports. The nylon
netting which forms the main part of the roof of the flight is attached to
the inner edges of this wire netting, with a small overlap. If the flight is
not built on to anothei flight or shelter there is some advantage in allowing
the wire netting perimeter to project outwards around the top edge of the
aviary for about 6 in. This acts as a barrier to cats and similar predators.
This proved 100% successful. In addition, with frequent use the edges
of nets became frayed and by the use of the wire netting perimeter nets
were given a new lease of life. The wire netting surround also prevented
cats from gaining access to enclosures when the nylon netting was removed
for liberty experiments. Some cheap grades of nylon netting can be torn
by Tawny Owls striking at birds in aviaries.

6o

T. S. THOMSON — NYLON NETTING

When fixing on a large net it is first taken to a neighbouring field,
pegged out, the corners marked and the net rolled up in one long strip
and then folded up for easy carriage. Taking the wind direction into
account, the netting is unfolded along one side of the aviary and made
secure. It is then unrolled, the wind being a great help. When netting
is removed it is usual practice to mark the corners with some ties and
again make full use of the wind. A soft broom is also used to piod
upwards at the netting in order that it be rolled or folded to one side.

The net-makers do not state how long nets last as this very much
depends on the prevailing local weather conditions during the time that
they are in use. Nylon netting is not intended as a permanent cover for
aviaries but is primarily used during the breeding season. However, in
order to put it to some sort of test a square yard was permanently fixed
over a safety door entrance. The net of f in. mesh made up of the
cheapest quality one strand netting withstood 6J in. of snow. The
netting sold as aviaiy quality is several times stronger, in fact it can
support a man grasping with one hand. It is, of course, several times the
price. The cheapest grade of nylon netting costs less than wire netting
of the same mesh, while the top grade of nylon is more expensive.

While we do seem to receive sufficient sunlight to affect nylon nets in
this country, snow presents the biggest problem. Aviaries are flimsy
structures and where nylon is employed this is even more so the case.
Tests were carried out by leaving a 50 ft. x 50 ft. unit cover by nylon all
the winter. Result, total collapse after a 6J in. fall of snow. The
structure withstood 3 in. and 4 in. falls. It was the surrounding framework
and the cross wires which fractured, bringing the netting down over trees
enclosed in the aviary. The netting was extensively torn. The total
weight of snow was calculated at over 3 tons, assuming 1 in. of rain is
equivalent to 1 ft. of fresh snow and one cubic foot of water weighs 62J lbs.

Where the perimeter wire netting is fixed it has been found unnecessary
to remove members of the pheasant family when the nylon roof was
removed. While nylon netting has never been fixed here in the vertical
position, reports have been received of birds being caught up under such
conditions.

M. D. ENGLAND— THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

6l

THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

( Lanius schach)

By M. D. England (Neatishead, Norfolk, England)

The following most unscientific — not to say sentimental — notes were
prepared for publication before the interesting and informative article by
Herr Reinhard Hoppe appeared in print (Avicultural Magazine 5, 75,
1969, 161-164). Since there is so much that he says with which I agree —
though not all, which is hardly surprising — and the case-history of the
one bird which I have recorded here bears out so well some of the points
which he makes, I have amended slightly what I have written so as to
emphasize points of agreement and disagreement. I feel sure that what
both he and I have written will, at the very least, cause a lifting of the eye¬
brows of both the “ for and against mealworm ” brigades, but this will
be all to the good if future aviculturists benefit from our experiences.

On the question of mealworms, may I say at once that I am very much
on the side of the “ ayes ”, and that I use them almost exclusively for
hand-rearing. My wife and I have hand-reared, from the small nestling
stage, Hoopoes Upupa epops , Rollers Coracius garrulus, Black-eared
Wheatears Oenanthe hispanica , Rufous Bush-chats Agrobates galactotes ,
Woodchat Shrikes Lanius senator , among many other species, on practically
nothing else, most of the birds living to a ripe old age. The Black-eared
Wheatears bred at seven years old (for the first time, having fought bitterly
until then!) and one of the Rollers is now at Birdland, Bourton-on-the-
Water, hale and hearty in his tenth year. I am sure that it is most
important to remember that all these birds had “ a good dietetic start ”,
in that they were fed on natural food by their parents until about ten days
old, a quite different matter from being fed only on mealworms from
hatching. May I hasten to add that I know that many outstanding first-
breedings have been achieved on mealworms alone but, however much I
favour them, I think it fair comment to say that it is probable that in such
cases success has been despite the mealworms and not because of them!

It may be of interest to note here that Great Grey Shrikes Lanius
excubitor , though eating mealworms with relish and disgorging pellets
which contain only the skin, heads, and claws, do not eat maggots readily
and seem quite unable to digest them, bringing up a mass of whole
maggots shortly after swallowing them. On the other hand, they eat
blow-fly pupae and the resulting pellets contain the cases only. My pair
killed off two broods of their nestling by giving them nothing but these.
The young could not digest the cases and were not old enough to regurgitate
pellets. As a result, post-mortem examination showed death to be due
to an impacted mass of blow-fly pupal cases. I shall take good care that
the parents do not have access to them again during the breeding season.

62

M. D. ENGLAND — THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

I obtained my Rufous-backed Shrikes by mistake. A year or two
before, the female of my pair of Bay-backed Shrikes Lanius vittatus had
died, and all my efforts to find a replacement had failed. They are such
lovely little shrikes, with most intriguing ways, that I thought I would
make one last attempt by accepting responsibility for a whole consignment
from India of up to a dozen, in the hope that there would be an odd female
among them. Dealers tell me that they do not like shrikes since they are
often difficult to sell. I cannot understand why, because it would be
hard to find a family of birds which is more rewarding in captivity and
with such interesting habits.

In due course a telephone message told me that ten had arrived “ but
only seven are alive this morning ”. This was not surprising, since all
ten had been put together in a large cage. Few birds are more murderously
territorial, and out of the breeding season those at the lower end of the
pecking order, if they escape death by violence, would meet it by starva¬
tion. I was also told that “ there didn’t seem to be any Bay-backed
among them ” ! My unprintable reply to the effect that, whatever species
they were, they must immediately be separated was, I am thankful to say,
acted upon but I was in a quandary because, since I work in a hospital,
I was not going to be able to get home until Friday night at the earliest
and this was only Tuesday. John Yealland very kindly came to the
rescue by offering to look after them all pending sorting out.

Of the original ten birds, four had been Great Grey Shrikes Lanius
excubitor and six Rufous-backed Lanius Schach. There now remained
two grey and five of the others, one of the latter looking very seedy indeed.
On the Friday night I made a start by taking home the two greys, followed
a week later by two of the Rufous-backed. The choice of a “ pair ” was
by sheer guesswork because sexual plumage differences in the latter
species, if any, require a more discerning eye than mine. They were put
in a divided cage with a wire partition, which was a mistake because next
morning both had their faces covered in blood. Cardboard reinforcement
to the partition lasted only a very short time before they managed to
“ get at ” each other, so they were soon moved to adjacent small flights
in a bird-room. These are little more than large cages, with a floor area of
less than three feet square. Although they could, of course, see each other,
fighting stopped and they ignored each other completely.

The normal daily feed for the pair, except when feeding young, consists
of about 25 mealworms, and/or 30 or more maggots, locusts and wasps as
available, and about half an ounce of lean ox-heart chopped up small and
rolled in soft-food, Vionate, powdered cuttle, yeast powder and occasion¬
ally powdered baby food.

I had no spare aviaries and, if I thought about it at all, I dismissed all
thoughts of breeding until next year. Indeed, one day I found one of them
sitting on the window ledge looking very sick. I was just turning away to
reach for an infra-red lamp when I saw her do a little “ shuffle ” : she

Avicult. Mag.

Fig. i. Juvenile Rufous-backed Shrike Lanius schach, 28 days old. Note deformed feet
and general retarded development.

Copyright ] [M. D. England

Fig. 2. Juvenile Rufous-backed Shrike Lanius schach, 53 days old. Note hind toes.

M. D. ENGLAND — THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

63

was not sick but “ broody A handful of dry grass proved it, for she
immediately flew down and, gathering an immense beakful, started looking
for a site in her very bare quarters. I hastily fixed up a bundle of twigs
and a rolled-up piece of wire netting, and within a couple of hours the
latter had a nest in it. Meanwhile the other bird next door had taken no
notice at all. I thought that at least I might get some indication of its
sex if I put it in with the other, so, prepared for murder, I opened the
communicating door. Within a very short while another nest had been
built in the bundle of twigs. Two hens!

By this time John Yealland’s place had been taken by Peter Olney and
I quickly arranged to try the other shrikes one at a time until one gave
signs that it was a male. However, by the following weekend and before
I could do this, one of the first pair was incubating three eggs in the nest
in the wire and was being fed by the other bird. No signs of courtship or
mating were seen and, although by now we were calling the sitting one
“ she ”, the sex of the other was still in some doubt because, while it
certainly occasionally fed the sitting bird, it continued to add to the other
nest in a desultory way.

A fortnight later doubts were dispelled by the sitting bird, on receipt of
a mealworm from the other, rising and passing it on to something beneath
it, and when I cautiously put my head in the door to feed them I received a
sharp blow on the nose from an enraged dive-bomber. (Although he
never attacked my wife, he always came screaming down at me. When,
later on, I wanted to examine the nest I must have looked pretty silly
climbing in the door with a hat on!)

No parents could have tended their young more carefully, though they
refused to feed them with anything but mealworms, despite the fact that
they themselves were used to a mixed diet. Every possible alternative
was tried, but they starved the young rather than give them any other kind
of food. Even mealworms with the slightest touch of Abidec,
Vionate or yeast powder were not touched, or only eaten by the parents.
At the end of a fortnight it was apparent that all was not well, because
the female was still brooding most of the time and no gaping beaks were
visible when either she or her mate carried food to the nest. When they
began bringing the food away from the nest uneaten, I decided that I
must investigate. The enraged parents were shut away while I miserably
removed two fully-feathered but moribund youngsters. One was very
dead indeed, but the other had a faint spark of life. Its open beak was
crammed with putrefying food, it lay limp in my hand and it had not the
strength even to lift its head. Its eyes were closed, it lay on its side, and
its toes were deformed and in what, had it been human, would have been
described as a “ talipes equino varus ” position. Every now and then
its whole body was racked by a violent spasm. Poor little mite, the kind
thing would have been to put it out of its misery. But a Rufous-backed
Shrike . . . and what an exercise in hand- rearing !

64

M. D. ENGLAND — THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

It is one thing to hand-rear a young bird which is healthy and has had a
natural start from a nutritional point of view; quite another in circum¬
stances such as these, where the most optimistic diagnosis was polyneuritis
with paralysis and possibly also rickets, almost certainly resulting from a
dietary deficiency. He (it quickly became “ George ” — even my violent
dislike of anthropomorphism could not resist this) was wrapped in a cloth,
with a thermometer beside him, and put under a “ non-luminous ” lamp
set to maintain about ioo°F. The food-stuffed bill was cleaned up and
he was left for an hour. To our great relief he had defaecated, and
thereafter his bed was lined with a frequently-changed piece of toilet
paper. Force-feeding began, with chopped-up mealworms treated with
Cytacon, Abidec or cod-liver oil and dipped in Meritene (a well-balanced
baby and invalid food manufactured in Portugal under licence from the
D. H. Doyle Pharmaceutical Company). Later he was forced to consume
large quantities of Vionate. At first it was difficult to get the food down,
because paralysis had affected swallowing and the little tongue hung out
to one side of the bill. But soon he began feebly to gape, his eyes opened —
though one appeared to be sightless — and as each succeeding morning
found him still alive we began to realise that our belief that he was
improving was not just wishful thinking. He could raise his head when
he gaped, swallowing became less and less of an effort, he even tried to lift
himself on his poor little crippled feet.

At a month old he was trying to grip with the toes of one foot, he looked
around alertly with both eyes, and he called incessantly for food. It
looked as though we were really winning. By now he ruled the whole
household. And then, tragedy! One evening before being closed down
for the night he was enjoying his usual freedom of the room, flying from
shoulder to shoulder, when one of our dogs nosed open the door and,
although it made no aggressive movement, George took fright. He flew
to the only place where he could hurt himself — the slightly-open door of
a cupboard where he caught his head in the crack and fell to the floor
unmoving and apparently dead. With a heavy heart I picked up the
little body. There seemed no doubt this time. And yet there was the
faintest pulse, though he was completely unconscious. Once more the
cloth bed and heat, though this time with no hope at all. At the crack of
dawn I went sadly to look. There he lay, eyes closed, head sagging, bill
slightly open — but alive.

It was not a question of “ going back to square one ” — we were further
back than when we started. But once more — heat, force-feeding, gross
over-doses of everything we knew; the blindness, the paralysis, the useless
toes, the poor lolling tongue. And once more George slowly came back.

He is now, in early January, nearly six months old. He lives in a cage
though he prefers to be out of it, flying from shoulder to shoulder and
exploring the room. He can, of course, feed himself perfectly well,
though he shouts continually to be fed, or perhaps for a game or a ride on

M. D. ENGLAND — THE RUFOUS-BACKED SHRIKE

65

our hand. He grips a perch with both feet, though one will never be
much good to him. During his freedom of the room, he finds it easier to
hang from the curtains than to perch on slippery furniture.

When we are too busy to do more than put his food in the cage and he
feels neglected, he gets in a rage and, after a period of shouting, he tears
up the newspaper in his cage and fills the water pot with it or pokes it
through the wire so that it floats all over the floor of the room. He also
violently pecks the first outstretched hand.

By 30th October (at nearly fifteen weeks old) adult plumage had been
assumed except for some very faint brown barring of the flanks. This is
much quicker than any record of which I am aware for any other species of
shrike. For some time it was assumed to be female because, whenever I
approached closely or put out a hand to pick her up, she “ crouched ” in
what looked like an invitatory posture, to me, her supranormal mate.
However, I now know that I was wiong about this, since this posture is
the means whereby the parents resolve a squabble or fight. The dominant
bird, though obviously still “raring to go”, desists when its opponent
crouches, head right down pointing at the floor, in submission. I only
hope they will continue to settle their differences in this way, since I
simply cannot spare separate aviaries for them.

Directly he was able to move about his cage he began trying to impale or
wedge his food. Although various species of shrikes have been hand-reared
before and it seems unlikely that they learned impaling from seeing it done
by their parents, it is probable that this is the first occasion when a
youngster which was blind on removal from its parents has impaled
immediately it was strong enough to do so, thus showing conclusively
that the action is innate. In the same context it is worthy of note that
his warning notes and song are normal although he cannot possibly have
heard any of his own species since he was a fortnight old. It may be of
interest to add that, in addition to food, he impales pieces of newspaper.

He is now no longer as tame as he was, since we have less time to devote
to him, and when his cage is approached in such a way that he cannot see
that the approaching person is one with whom he is familiar, he performs
bill-snapping, similar to that done by owls in like circumstances.

Since I am away from home at least three days and nights each week,
the credit, if any, goes largely to my wife, who devoted herself to yet
another foundling with an unshakable determination that he should live.

REFERENCE

Beven, G., and England, M. D. Impaling of prey by shrikes. British Birds
62, 192-199.

66 D. G. HANOVER — DILUTE FORM OF THE KEY-WEST QUAIL DOVE

A DILUTE FORM OF THE KEY-WEST
QUAIL DOVE

By Donald G. Hanover (Tarzana, California, U.S.A.)

Keeping and breeding foreign doves and pigeons is a hobby that poses
many problems and difficulties. Especially true is this when it comes to
the rarer varieties of foreign doves and pigeons, concerning whose living
habits in the wild we know but very little. Take the Key-West Quail
Dove, for example, that handsome, gentle, almost pigeon-sized bird,
which made its debut in this country not many years ago, and which
today is found in limited numbers in a few fanciers’ aviaries.

These doves are mainly chestnut-brown above and duller brown on the
wings, with extensive irridescence of green and purple, not only on the
top of the head and neck but also over most of the back. The sides of
the head are dark brown with a conspicuous white streak below the eye;
and the throat is white. The underside is mauvish-grey, browner on the
flanks and whiter on the belly.

I happen to be one of the fortunate owners of several pairs of Key-West
Quail Doves, Geotrygon chrysia , which have been living, and modestly
breeding, in my aviaries now for several years. All of them, without
exception, are descended from the first pair, there having been no fresh
imports of this very interesting, beautiful dove in recent years. In other
words, the offspring produced is the result of in-breeding, of mating
closely related members of one family with one another.

On rare occasions such matings will bring forth surprisingly strange
colour patterns, which in no wise resemble the plumage colour of the
parent bird. Well, I am happy to report such a radical colour variation,
namely a dilute form of Key-West Quail Dove, which is, in all probability,
the only representative of this variant. The breast and under parts are
almost white, the head, neck, back, wings, and tail are an off-white, and
when closely examined are very pale buff and light grey. All the colouring
is considerably reduced and the iridescence disappears. The eyes are a
very bright, sharp red. At this writing the bird is nearly full grown, to all
appearances lively and vigorous. In shape and form, and habit, it is
and acts like a normal Key- West Quail Dove. To date its actions have
not as yet revealed its sex. Depending on it, I plan to mate this unique
dove back to its male or female parent in the hope of getting another
dilute, or near dilute specimen, which together I might utilize to produce
a strain or family of variant Key-West Quail Doves. Needless to say,
I am both surprised and delighted with this happy event, and I hope to
report in the future on the breeding results from this dilute Key- West
Quail Dove.

Some years ago, there was a request from a conservation group in
Key- West, Florida, hoping to purchase a few doves for restocking. It is

Avicult. Mag,

Normal Key-West Quail Dove.

Dilute variety of the Key-West Quail Dove.

Copyright ]

[ D. G. Hanover

Avicult. Mag.

Playground of Lawes’ Six-Plumed Bird of Paradise.

Immature Blue Bird of Paradise.

Copyright ]

[ H . Smyth

H. SMYTH — HAND-REARING AND OBSERVING BIRRS OF PARADISE 67

tery possible that the Key- West Quail Dove is now extinct in its native
habitat, namely Key-West, Florida, and two or three Islands in the
Caribbean.

# # *

1 HAND-REARING AND OBSERVING BIRDS
OF PARADISE

By H. Smyth (Manley, New South Wales, Australia)

I recently returned from Papua-New Guinea after spending almost
two years there, mainly in the Southern Highlands District, where I
spent most of my leisure time birdwatching, though I did manage to keep
a few birds in cages for short periods, so perhaps a few notes may be of
interest.

Without doubt the most interesting members of my small collection
were a Blue Bird of Paradise Paradisaea rudolphi and a Lawes’ six-plumed
Bird of Paradise Parotia lawesi , purchased as fledglings at Tari markets.

Market days are held twice weekly at Tari where the natives offer a
wide range of locally produced produce, and occasionally birds, too, are
offered for sale and with the possible exception of parrots, most birds
I have seen for sale at the markets have been quite young and unable to
feed themselves. I was first aware that fledgling Birds of Paradise
could be bought, when a friend asked me to identify a bird offered to
him by a local Tari boy.

It was quite clearly a Blue Bird of Paradise, not long out of the nest
and though it looked healthy and gaped readily it made no attempt to fly,
but sat in the boy’s open hand in such a relaxed way that I believed it to
have been hand-reared.

Regulations concerning the keeping of Birds of Paradise within the
territory are quite definite so my friend was reluctant to buy, but after
being assured by his house boy, who was acting as interpreter, that the
blue bird, if not sold, would surely be eaten, he paid the twenty cents
asked.

Unfortunately this bird died after a few days and I suspect that like
birds subsequently bought by me it had been disabled, prior to capture,
by being hit by a stick or stone thrown by the boys, who are surprisingly
accurate.

On 13th July 1968 I bought at the market a young Lawes’ six-plumed
Parotia which had an injured leg but otherwise appeared healthy, and it
also gaped readily.

Insects and fruit seemed a reasonable guess as to its food requirements,
and after a worrying first few days the youngster settled down to a diet of
insects, mostly cicadas and moths attracted to the lights at night, and
paw-paw and bananas mashed together with powdered milk. Mashed

68 H. SMYTH — HAND-REARING AND OBSERVING BIRDS OF PARADISE

paw-paw and powdered milk later proved to be more satisfactory, for if
allowed to stand for an hour or more this mush becomes quite firm, is
enjoyed by the birds, does not soil the feathers to any great extent and
droppings are much firmer than when banana is added, again reducing
the risk of fouled plumage.

On 31st August I acquired, for 20 cents, a beautiful young Blue Bird
of Paradise, similar to the one mentioned previously, though much
brighter in colour but unfortunately more knocked about than the previous
bird.

Again, after a very shaky start, it began to do well but later sloughed
two toes which were broken when I bought it.

Both birds became very tame and when anyone approached crouched
down on the perch, gaped widely and with quivering wings begged for
food.

The Blue Bird made quite a feature of wing quivering and continued to
do so up until the time I disposed of it at about five months old.

I suspect this is a habit of the species, for when visiting Tari at a later
date, February 1969, I was resting in a thick patch of forest when a young
fully grown Blue Bird perched quite close to me. This bird, though not
in full colour, had lost most of its juvenile plumage and had blue in the
lesser wing coverts.

Whilst studying it through my binoculars I was surprised to see a
handsome bird, presumably its mother, alight alongside it. The young
bird went through all the previously described begging motions, though
it was fully as big as its parent and the older bird proceeded to feed it five
small black berries, probably stored in its throat or beak, since it made no
display of regurgitation as would a pigeon.

Both birds sat together for a while and a striking difference was the
size of the adult’s beak as compared with the younger bird. The pale
grey colour of the adult beak may have helped give an impression of
greater size and though perhaps no longer, I feel sure its other dimensions
were considerably larger.

The Lawes’ six-plumed in juvenile plumage resembles the mature hen,
with black head and brown body, underparts barred with darker brown.

These brown birds, with occasional fully coloured males, could often
be seen feeding in berry-bearing trees near native gardens and in timbered
areas. One peculiarity of the young bird is two tufts of feathers on its
head, probably in the position where the plumes normally grow.

These small tufts stand about a quarter of an inch above the other
head feathers but are only noticeable when the bird erects all its head
feathers, as it occasionally does.

What prompts the young bird to do this I am unable to say for sure,
but suspect it to be an attempt at display, though I have seen the head
feathers raised when a large bird flew past, but fright will not always
bring this reaction.

H. SMYTH — HAND-REARING AND OBSERVING BIRDS OF PARADISE 69

In October 1968 I returned to Sydney and left my birds with a friend
at Kagua, where they were housed in a mixed collection, including tree
kangaroos, wallabies and cuscus.

It was late in November when we were reunited at Mendi and the
change the separation had brought was surprising, particularly in the
Parotia, which was extremely fit and aggressive and attacked me savagely
whenever I put my arm in the cage.

I was forced to separate the birds since the Blue Bird looked so shabby
as compared to its companion whose feathers, though still coloured like
the female, were quite glossy.

The Blue Bird was still friendly and confiding and as mentioned
previously begged for titbits and with a little extra care was soon back to
normal.

Feeding was something of a problem since Mendi is cooler than other
stations of similar altitude, and many fruits, such as paw-paw are not
available, but both birds proved themselves adaptable and ate, reluctantly
at times, tinned fruit, raisins, tomatoes, minced steak and even fish.
However, the food position was not entirely satisfactory and when at
the end of December 1968 I learned that a friend was going to visit the
Baiyer River sanctuary I asked him to take both birds along to Fred Shaw-
Mayer, who was then in charge.

Birds of Paradise appear hardy and are certainly easier to hand-rear
than many common birds here in Australia.

I think the diet I gave them was not quite adequate since neither bird
flew well. However, I could not detect anything wrong with their wings.

The Lawes’ six-plume and the Superb are perhaps the most common
of the Birds of Paradise in the Southern Highlands area.

Though more secretive and less noisy than the Superb, they, the
Lawes’ six-plume, are reasonably numerous both in heavily timbered
country and more open areas and do not appear at higher altitudes than
about 6,000 ft. They are often heard and less often seen as one walks
along native tracks in timbered areas and keeping low in dense cover the
birds utter their harsh call and appear at times to follow one for short
distances.

Playgrounds belonging to this species are fairly easy to find in most
areas and at Tari, within half a mile of the council house, in a few acres of
heavy timber, adjacent to native gardens I spent some time observing and
trying to photograph both Lawes’ six-plumed and Blue Birds of Paradise.

There were two playgrounds in this area within a few yards of one
another and whenever one approached closely, no matter from what
direction, the Parotid's harsh cry would ring out and usually a fully
coloured male would be seen for a moment.

On one occasion, five birds, including the adult male, came on my
approach and stayed close by for a while. Four were of similar colour

70 H. SMYTH — HAND-REARING AND OBSERVING BIRDS OF PARADISE

to the female, though one had plumes. I had seen this bird on more than
one occasion and believe its head feathers to be more glossy than the others.

Both cleared areas were roughly of the same area (about 40 to 50 square
feet). One roughly oval and the other very irregular, and I saw no
evidence of decoration on either.

Each had a horizontal or near horizontal branch close by and within
5 ft. of the ground. These branches appeared much used and how they
came to be bent over in such a way I am unable to say, obviously too
strong for these birds to bend, I suspect it is the presence of a horizontal
stick which influences the choice of play area. The Blue Birds of Paradise
which often share this patch of timber were usually easy to find, since
their call is so characteristic and loud.

At a distance it reminds me of the clang of hammer on steel, but oi^l
closer approach this resemblance does not hold, however the call is quite
loud and distinctive.

At close quarters and in dense undergrowth one can often be guided to
the Blue Bird by his habit of mumbling (as though talking to itself) during
preening and partial display, and by following this call I have come within
a few yards of a splendid male, displaying upside down, less than 6 ft.
from the ground, but surrounded by heavy undergrowth. Although
obvious of my presence and keeping a watchful eye on me, this bird
continued to display for at least a minute.

Though these Blue Birds eat fruit, I have never seen them feeding with
other species but have often watched them hopping along moss-covered
branches probing about for insects and on one occasion I saw a well-
plumed male bird moving up the trunk of a dead tree in the manner of a
tree creeper.

The accompanying photograph of the playground of Lawes’ six-plumed
Bird of Paradise was taken at Karoba about 25 miles from Tari. Despite
its rather untidy appearance I think this one was still in use since it was
the warning calls of the bird which caused me to investigate the area.
Most playgrounds, though generally similar to the one pictured, are kept
very clean and free from fallen leaves, etc. Because of the much heavier
timber growth and consequent poor light, the other playgrounds mentioned
could not satisfactorily be photographed.

J. DELACOUR — BRAZILIAN BIRD COLLECTIONS

71

BRAZILIAN BIRD COLLECTIONS

By J. Delacour (Cleres, France)

Once again I had the pleasure of visiting Brazil in November 1969,
spending a couple of weeks with my friend Dr. E. P. Beraut near Rio de
Janeiro. His collection of tropical birds and plants looked better than
ever. Gardening and bird-keeping in a warm country are particularly
rewarding — there is very little trouble caused by the climate, although the
most delicate species should be well sheltered from winds during the cooler
season, and you can enjoy your collections outdoors every month of the
year. Dr. Beraut’s garden is large and hilly, situated at the foot of a
rocky mountain, close to two others (Gavea and Tijuca) and also to the
ocean.

It looks like a huge conservatory, as the plants are those seen in the
hot-houses of botanical gardens, but, of course, grown on a much
bigger scale. The trees are overloaded with orchids, bromeliads and other
epiphytes. There is a rushing torrent over rocks and several pools. A
few Trumpeters, Demoiselles, Crowned Cranes, Scarlet Ibises, Roseate
Spoonbills and Egrets have the run of the grounds, and wild birds are
numerous on the trees and bushes, the commonest of which are the
Tricolored Tanager and several species of Hummingbirds. Dozens of
them are always buzzing around the verandah where bottles of nectar are
kept ready for them. The most numerous are the Dusky Jacobine
(Melanotrochilus fuscus) and the Blue-headed Wood-Nymph ( Thalurania
glaucopis ), but Swallowtails ( Eupetomena macroura), Mangos
(Anthracothorax nigricollis) and Brazilian Violet-ears ( Colibri serrirostris)
also come to drink. A female Pigmy Hermit had a nest in a nearby bush,
but she never sought the bottles.

Although there are 25 aviaries, large and small, and more in the making,
none can be seen when you walk through the grounds. All are built
along the outer fences, sheltered by walls and hidden by shrubbery.
With the exception of those occupied by parrots, all are heavily planted.

Three of the flights are of large size and full of trees and plants. They
are close together, but irregular in shape. A corridor divides two of them
and gives access to a bird kitchen and to shelters where caged birds and
hand-fed fledglings are kept. Nine compartments run along the back of
the third aviary, and plans are made for making another dozen of those
breeding accommodations, where pairs of birds are secluded. At present,
they consist of several pairs of Eclectus Parrots, most of them reared there,
some Toucanets, Motmots, Taccazze Sunbirds, Garnet-throated Hum¬
mingbirds, Blue and Golden-breasted Sugarbirds, Fairy Bluebirds, the
latter with young. When pairs of birds are showing signs of nesting in
the larger aviaries, they are quickly removed to the privacy of these
breeding pens. The corridor is the home of a few pets — a Razorbill
Curassow, a Sun Bittern and a Purple-capped Lory.

72

J. DELACOUR — BRAZILIAN BIRD COLLECTIONS

The three large flights contain remarkable species of soft-billed Passerine
birds, exotic as well as South American, of which it no doubt is the best
collection existing today.

The first one is inhabited by a pair of Umbrella Birds ( Cephalopterus
penduliger ), and three male and two female Guianan Cock of the Rock
(Rupicola rupicola). They are all tame, agree perfectly well, the male
Cocks of the Rock displaying together. A Lesser Bird of Paradise has
been there for eight years and is in superb plumage. A pair of Blue¬
winged Pittas and a Brazilian Ant-Pitta ( Grallaria varid) also live in peace
as well as a few smaller birds: Golden-winged Sunbirds, a Waterton’s
Wood-Nymph, and a few small Formicariidae, including the lovely Pithys
albifrons , a small black and chestnut ant-catcher, with a crested white face
of the most unusual appearance. I have seen long ago these curious
birds following army ants in French Guiana whence Charles Cordier
brought some to Cleres later on.

Another large flight is the home of Central American and Golden¬
headed Quetzals, Scarlet Cocks of the Rock, a number of Cotingas : a lovely
and tame Swallow-tailed {Phibalura flaviventris), a Bare-necked Fruitcrow
(Gymnoderus foetidus) and a Black-necked Tityra {T. cay ana) ; a Swallow¬
winged Puff bird ( Chelidoptera tenebrosa), various Tanagers, Scarlet¬
chested Sunbirds; several small Hummingbirds ( Sericotes holosericeus ,
Augastes lumachellus, Stephanoxis lalandei); White-capped Redstarts
( Chimarrhornis ), Royal, Splendid, Amethyst Starlings, American Jacanas
(nesting), different Plovers, etc.

The largest aviary (about 35 ft. x 25 ft.), heavily planted, has a little
winding river where Cotton Teal can swim; there are also Roulrouls and
small Rails {Later alias leucopyrrhus ); but it is otherwise dedicated to small
species. There are Sunbirds {N. pulchella ), Hummingbirds of several
sorts, Paradise Tanagers, different Sugarbirds, Flowerpeckers ( Dicaeum ),
African Paradise Flycatchers, a few Old World Robins, and Blue Cotingas.
But most remarkable is the collection of Manakins, which live there in
perfect condition and never quarrel: Pipra fascicauda, P. erythrocephala ,
P. rubrocapilla, P. pipra , P. serena, Manacus manacus , Chiroxiphia linearis ,
C. caudata , C. pareola, Elicura militarise Machaeropterus pyrocephalus, and
the magnificent Antilophia galeata, a fairly large Manakin from the interior
of Brazil (I found it common in Goias), black, with scarlet helmeted head
and back.

There are other groups of aviaries. Two good-sized ones contain pairs
of African Pigmy Kingfishers, Irena’s Pittas, Jamaican Long- tailed
Hummingbirds, Blue-and- White Indian Flycatchers and a few others.
Five more are inhabited by Ross and White-headed Touracous, Short¬
tailed Antthrushes ( Chamaeza ), Gnateaters ( Conopophaga ), several species
of small Rails, Roulrouls, etc. There are pairs of Leadbeater’s Cockatoos
and Queen of Bavaria’s Conures in a large flight. The conures were laying
in a log, but it is interesting to note that the Cockatoos, although in perfect

J. DELACOUR — BRAZILIAN BIRD COLLECTIONS

73

condition, have never nested, probably due to the lack of a cold enough
winter and of too much humidity. Elsewhere live several Toucanets
( Aulacorhynchus sulcatus , Pteroglossus heauharnaiesi , P. bitorquatus) a
number of Hummingbirds, Sunbirds, and various small insect and fruit
eaters.

At the time of my visit, many nestlings collected very young
in Dr. Beraut’s extensive land holdings at Tapirapuan, Mato Grosso, were
being hand-raised. The most interesting ones were 16 Trogons of four
species (T. strigilatus , melanurus , curucui , collaris ); Cotingas, Puff birds,
Swallow Tanagers ( Tersina ) and 17 Jacamars ( Galbula ruficauda). These
were in broods of three or four. Very small when I arrived, they grew up
rapidly and were flying and perching within 10 or 12 days. Absurdly
tame, they were fed every hour on small, soft pellets composed of one-
third ground beef heart, one-third grated carrots, one-third maize cake
(cooked). These highly insectivorous birds are perfectly raised on that
diet, which they continue to eat when grown up. They live so well on it
that they have attempted to nest, digging in an artificial bank. But they
are quarrelsome birds, and the female injured the male. Adult-caught
Jacamars always refuse any food but live mealworms and never lived
long; Dr. Beraut hardly gives any to his Jacamars, mealworms being
scarce in Brazil. There was also an excellent young Squirrel Cuckoo
( Piaya cay and) and a Nightjar, fed the same way as were the young
Trogons.

Because of various difficulties in procuring certain foods, all birds in
Dr. Beraut’s aviaries receive that same meat-carrot-maize bread mixture,
with diced cheese and for fruit, cut-up tomato and papaya, and occasionally
grapes; practically nothing else. They all remain in perfect health as
well as in excellent plumage and colour; all the red tones are perfectly
preserved by the carotenes contained in tomatoes and carrots.

Because of lack of time, I never could visit all the different collections
in the Rio area, nor pay a visit to Dr. Ruschi at Santa Teresa, in the State
of Espfrito Santo. But I saw those of Mr. Mario Ventura and Dr.
Augusto Nim Ferreira, in Rio, as well as the aviaries of Mr. Nelson
Kawall, Mr. Jorge Arnhold, and of the Zoological Park in Sao Paulo,
all of great interest.

Mr. Ventura and Dr. Ferreira live in town and have very little outdoor
space. They, however, keep remarkably large and fine collections of
birds, both native and exotic, either in rather small aviaries or in cages.

Mr. Ventura has a number of outdoor flights, not very big, but cleverly
designed to save space, in which are housed many Hummingbirds,
Manakins, Tanagers, Sugarbirds and other small softbills, all in perfect
condition. He also keeps, isolated in cages in his house, a number of
hard-bills, mostly hybrids and colour mutations of Seedeaters ( Sporophila )
and Rice-Grosbeaks ( Oryzoborus ), many of them marvellous songsters.

G

74

J. DELACOUR — BRAZILIAN BIRD COLLECTIONS

It appears that there is in nature a large proportion of unmated female
Oryzoborus because so many males are captured and kept as singing cage
birds. The result is the occurrence of hybrids between them and males of
various Sporophila. These natural hybrids are eagerly sought for.

Dr. Ferreira has even less outdoor room than Mr. Ventura and most of
his birds are kept in cages. His collection is large and varied, including,
besides small birds, Woodpeckers and Parrots. They also are beautifully
kept and in admirable condition.

Mr. N. Kawall, in Sao Paulo, possesses an extensive garden, where
he has built a long double row of aviaries. He also disposes of many
cages in a hall. He specializes in plumage aberrations of native birds,
which he propagates. He owns variants of many species. I particularly
noticed a beautiful Troupial, whose normally black parts are of a light
vinaceous brown, Blue Tanagers with white underparts and a series of
freak Saffron Finches, some pure lutinos.

Mr. J. Arnhold, also in Sao Paulo, has quite a different collection.
He keeps and rears on a large scale, both in extensive outdoor aviaries
which fill up a large walled garden, and in breeding box cages inside
galleries, very complete collections of Finches and Parakeets, mostly
Australian. It is all done according to the most modern techniques and
very well kept.

My visit to the Sao Paulo Zoological Park was a very pleasant surprise —
I had not been in that city for 14 years, and at that time, there was
no zoo of any importance. I knew that a new one had been built since,
but I had no idea that it was either so large or so good. True to say, it
has not been entirely finished and certain accommodations, mostly for the
larger animals, have not yet been built permanently. But all that have
been completed are particularly excellent and attractive; and it happens
that many of them are dedicated to birds.

This new zoo is situated outside of the huge city, among parks and
wooded hills, and extends over a considerable area. There is a large
and beautiful lake, with perhaps a hundred swans (Mute, Black and
Black-necked) and many other birds. There are so many Swans that
pairs do not try to establish a sizeable territory, nor to fight badly. But
broods with their parents are removed as soon as they hatch into breeding
pens, where they are reared. It seems to work perfectly. I also noticed
big broods of Orinoco Geese, and other waterfowl. There are two big
buildings, with partly open roofs. Groups of Cracids occupy one, water
birds the other. Several species of Curassows and Guans are there,
including a pair of the very rare Penelope ochrogaster. It is all roomy, well
designed and decorated.

Several very large flights, some still under construction, are situated
in a wooded ravine, scattered along a winding path and surrounded by
beautiful tropical plants and shrubbery. The aviaries themselves are
artistically planted and adorned with rocks and logs. Many gamebirds,

E. CALLEGARI — BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY BY ONE-YEAR-OLD SNOWY OWL 75

including four forms of Whistling Guans, Tinamous and other big birds
live and breed in them, and it all looks very pretty. There are other
houses and aviaries for smaller birds, of which a very good collection has
been assembled, but I particularly want to mention the Hummingbird
exhibit. It consists of a very large, walk-in aviary 100 ft. x 50 ft. x 30 ft.,
very well and lightly built of steel. As you enter it, you walk across a
beautifully laid out garden, with rocks, streams, trees and tender plants.
Some 400 Hummingbirds live in it and can be seen here and there as you
progress. The flight is so roomy that they can escape each other’s attacks.
It is a wonderful sight.

All these accommodations are a great credit to Dr. and Mrs. M. P.
Autuori, the Director and his wife. Mrs. Autuori has the paiticular
charge of the birds and is responsible for the excellent design of the
aviaries. They both should be highly congratulated, and also praised for
the excellent laboratories which have been organized for research of
various sorts. The Sao Paulo Zoological Park certainly counts as one of
the progressive institutions in the world, unique in South America.

# * #

BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY
BY A ONE-YEAR-OLD SNOWY OWL

By E. Callegari (Ravenna, Italy)

Having heard that Snowy Owls do not reproduce until they reach the
age of three, it seems to me right to notify what happened to a pair of
such birds I had bought at the Zoo of Basilea.

Towards the end of the summer 1967, I obtained a pair of Snowy Owls
born in the spring of the same year. They were so healthy and strong
that in the spring of 1968, they laid seven eggs. One of them got broken,
five were sterile, and one gave birth to a chick which, once grown, proved
to be a female.

This year, 1969, when they reached the age of two, they laid six eggs,
all fertile. One chick could not be found any more a few days after
hatching. Probably its brothers ate it. The other five Snowy Owls
have grown normally.

76

NEWS AND VIEWS

NEWS AND VIEWS

Professor Alessandro Ghigi, Senior Member, elected 1911, celebrated
his 95th birthday on 9th February, 1970.

Claude M. Payne was appointed O.B.E. in the New Year’s Honours’
List, “For public services He has succeeded K. M. Scamell as
President, Foreign Bird League.

Dr. Alfred Seitz has now retired from being Director, Nuernberg Zoo,
after 20 years.

# * #

B. E. Reed has pointed out an error, possibly of Editorial origin, in his
notes on the Scarlet-chested Sunbird in the November-December, 1969
number. On page 239, line 7, the full stop should occur after “ shaky ”,
not “ perch ”. He also informs us that, after moulting, the first 1969
young one proved to be a hen, the second a cock.

* * *

Breeding results, 1969. Dr. J. R. Hodges, Blue-winged Grass
Parrakeet, 20; Splendid, 12; Turquoisine, one.

R. T. Kyme: Stanley, seven; Mealy Rosella, six; Golden-mantled
Rosella, two; Pennant’s, five; Red-rumped, three; Turquoisine, five;
Fischer’s Lovebird, two; Weber’s Lorikeets now sitting.

Clifford Smith: White-crested Cockatoo, one; Citron-crested Cockatoo,
one; Leadbeater’s Cockatoo, two; Yellow-fronted Amazon, two; African
Grey, three (from two pairs); Double Yellow-headed Amazon, clear eggs.

* * *

Vanishing Amazons. Neil Macleod writes: “ We spent a year in

Dominica. Saw both male and female Imperial. Their mountain

retreat is very inaccessible. The odd part is that other species differ so
much between islands less than 50 miles apart, which could evince the
possibility of other species of Amazons inhabiting territory in small
locations within the Amazon valley. How the Caribbean parrots manage
to localize themselves is a mystery.”

* # #

T. Driver, Director, Kelling Park Aviaries, reports that the Mitchell’s
Lorikeets reared two young ones in 1968 and two in 1969. K. W. Dolton:
“ I bred one in 1968 which is still alive and well. Two were hatched in
1969 and although they left the nest in October they were badly plucked
and only lived two weeks.” L. W. Hill: “ The Mitchell’s Lorikeets have
bred every year in a colony with other species. The Kitlitz Plovers
have hatched this year.”

* * #

A short time ago the B.B.C., Bristol, enquired regarding the rearing or
breeding of Stone Curlews. F. W. Perowne, who is experienced in such
matters, kindly supplied an account of events. He writes: “ In 1964 I

NEWS AND VIEWS

77

picked up some eggs on this farm at South Creake because the nest was
amongst sugar beet which was being hand-hoed. These eggs were
already partly incubated and I had them in an incubator for about 14 days
before two hatched. One lived until the winter of 1965. I have not got
any proper wintering quarters and these appear essential. My interest is
really restricted to water fowl, and I have about 80 varieties, kept in
approximately five acres of pens. The Stone Curlews proved a very
interesting and worthwhile diversion.”

# # #

Last year I gave prominence to the fact that Dr. Alan Lendon had bred
a Slender-billed Cockatoo, in the belief that possibly it had not been bred
previously. In this I was, of course, very wrong. I am painfully sur¬
prised at this lapse. I am also surprised that only one member, Thomas
Brosset, Gothenburg, pointed out that not only had there been a breeding
account by Kenton C. Lint, with a photograph of a young one reared in
the San Diego Zoo, in 1959 (1959, 107), but that I had referred to this
and another success in my notes (1967, 21). On this occasion Homer
nodded with a vengeance!

* * #

Brian J. Hill records: “ I have bred Pagoda Mynas the last two seasons
and so, in the last week of June I purchased a pair of Common Mynas
from the Keston Foreign Bird Farm. Both had one wing clipped. I
put them in an aviary that had a large nest-box. They laid on 1st
September and by the 3rd had three eggs, both birds incubated. On the
14th I heard young calling. They fed the young well but I did not hear
any more calling until the 28th. On 8th and 9th October a young one
was sitting in the nest hole and it fledged next day. It is now at the Rode
Tropical Bird Gardens. The adults have now moulted and are full¬
winged. They appear to be very hardy but still sleep in the nest-box.”

# # #

In the Los Angeles Times , 10th November, 1969, an article on attempts
to save the Whooping Crane by breeding it in captivity at the Patuxent
Wildlife Research Center stated that the Center’s Assistant Director for
Endangered Wildlife Research, Dr. Ray Erickson, was insulted that the
Audubon Society should have referred to him as an aviculturalist (sic).
He is quoted as saying: “ I am not an aviculturalist. An aviculturalist is
a zoo keeper. I’m a scientist, a biologist.” This is a little narrow in
view of Colin Harrison’s definition of aviculture which was published in
the Magazine (1967, 178). We feel that Dr. Erickson should remember
that it was the efforts of men in many walks of life who were not zoo
keepers, but were proud to call themselves “ aviculturists ”, that created
both the background of knowledge and the climate of favourable opinion
that made his present conservation work possible.

78

NEWS AND VIEWS

A. C. Furner, before leaving for a visit to Uganda and Kenya, wrote:
“ It may be of interest to report the unusual doings of two Senegal Parrots
in my possession. Forty years ago I bought the first which has lived in
and out of its parrot-cage in my greenhouse bird-room ever since. The
second I purchased 25 years ago and it has had similar treatment to the
first. Both birds were loose together in the greenhouse until a few weeks
ago. They started flying on to my Gouldians’ cages and generally
causing uproar. My wife and I placed the two cages, open door to open
door, put a hollow log for them to play with, and so confined them to
cage life for the time being. They now have four eggs and the later one,
which turned out to be a hen, is sitting tight and is thoroughly enthusiastic
about the whole job. Naturally the eggs are unlikely to be fertile, but it
does strike me as being a good effort on the part of both birds — with ages
40 and 25 years respectively, and fully adult when they came into my
possession.”

# * *

It is pleasing to learn that John Wilson has a Pesquet’s Parrot
Psittrichas fulgidus. Since Lesson described and named this parrot
Psittacus pecquetii in 1831, there have been only about a dozen living
specimens in this country.

It has often been said that the first known living bird was in the Earl
of Derby’s collection at Knowsley Hall. This assertion is probably
based on Lear’s colour plate in the parrot volume of Jardine’s Naturalist's
Library (1836). Like many present-day artists, Lear preferred to paint
from living birds, and so it is presumably assumed that the bird depicted
was living. But it is more likely that the model was, in fact, a specimen
in Lord Derby’s museum.

There can really be little doubt that the first live Pesquet’s Parrot, a
female, was owned by the Marquess of Tavistock in 1918. After being
in his possession for a couple of years it passed to Mrs. M. Dalton-Burgess.
It died in 1924, in which year Mrs. Dalton-Burgess acquired a pair.

Wilfrid Frost imported one in August 1921; after a short stay at the
London Zoo it continued its journey to America. In October, 1926,
Walter Goodfellow brought two for J. Spedan Lewis — one of which he
presented to the London Zoo. Then in August, 1927, Walter Goodfellow
brought a pair for Herbert Whitley. One died before Christmas: the
other was his National Show winner that died in February, 1928. And
there was a female living in the London Zoo in 1936. I believe I saw all
of these, with the exception of Lord Tavistock’s original bird. The
majority seem to have been rather short-lived. It is to be hoped that
John Wilson’s bird will fare better.

Incidentally, who was the Pesquet later to have this parrot named in
his honour? In old specific names authors have variously named him
Pecquet, Pesquet, Pequet, Pequett, Pescquet and Pescquiet.

# # #

A. A. P.

REVIEWS

79

REVIEWS

BIRDS OF PARADISE AND BOWER BIRDS. By E. Thomas
Gilliard. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1969. Price 6 gns.

Unfortunately very few aviculturists have the opportunity of obtaining
live specimens of these gorgeous birds ; the appropriately named Birds of
Paradise, unsurpassed in their beauty and bizarre ceremonial dances, and
the Bower Birds with their extraordinary display grounds, one of the
strangest and least understood phenomenon in nature. These birds are
now very strictly protected in their native New Guinea and a few adjoining
islands, yet the annual killing of more than 80,000 males — mostly of only
three species — did not threaten any of the birds of paradise and the author
advocates that small numbers of the live birds might be collected each
year and exported to zoos and similar institutions, to be used for educational
purposes.

The author, accompanied by his wife, an ardent naturalist, made five
expeditions to some of the wildest parts of New Guinea and brought back
a wealth of information regarding the habits of these little known birds.
He advances the theory that the paradise and bower bird groups are derived
from a single colonization of New Guinea, first arboreal monogamous
birds which subsequently became polygymous and then diverged into
birds of paradise and bower birds and reverted to monogamy.

The evolution of bower building is so remarkable that one naturalist
has suggested that birds should be split into two categories, bower
birds and all other birds. The males of some species build elaborate
walled bowers of sticks and decorate them with bright objects and even
with paint. Others construct towers up to nine feet high, some with
tepee-like roofs and internal chambers situated on circular lawns that
they tend carefully and embellish with golden resins, garishly coloured
berries, irridescent insect skeletons and fresh flowers replaced as they
wither. These bowers are stages on which the males perform intricate
routines of sexual display and mate with the females of their species.
There are only 18 species called bowerbirds, all confined to New Guinea
and adjoining territory but there are in all some 85 species described as
arena birds with a worldwide distribution. The bower birds are con¬
sidered to be at the pinnacle of area evolution and have gone a step beyond
the most richly ornamented arena birds, substituting fancy houses and
jewellery for colourful plumage.

The birds of paradise on the other hand have developed most spectacular
varieties of plumage, both in colour and form, combined with characteristic
display performances. These are described in detail, when known,
together with the breeding behaviour and other observations on the
various species, including their distribution. Most of the species are
illustrated by photographs or sketches the majority by the author. There

8o

REVIEWS

is also a useful list of ornithological explorations in the New Guinea and
Moluccan Regions and a bibliography.

There are three appendices, one giving a list of ornithological explora¬
tions in the New Guinea and Moluccan Regions and another the account
of a visit to Little Tobago in 1958 where Sir William Ingram, founder of
the Illustrated London News , succeeded in placing 44 Greater Birds of
Paradise in 1909. It was estimated that by 1958 there were probably
less than 35 birds of paradise on the island but some were third generation
birds. Recently (1964) a hurricane is reported to have driven some of
these birds of paradise on to Tobago Island.

It is sad to have to record that the author died of a heart attack in New
York in 1965 while the manuscript of this volume was in the editor’s
hands. E. H.

* * #

AUSTRALIAN PARROTS. By Joseph M. Forshaw. Melbourne:
Lansdowne Press (distributed in the U.K. by Witherby: London)
1969. Price £13 10s.

With the enormous interest in the Australian parrot species and with
the lack of an adequate recent work covering the whole group, this present
book comes as a welcome and much-needed work consolidating the
increasing but scattered information on the subject. Solid would seem
to be an appropriate term since it measures 12 x 10x2 in. and registers
6j lb. on the kitchen scales. The book covers all the Australian parrot
species, including the Red-fronted Parrot and Kaka by virtue of their
occurrence, now or in the past, on Norfolk Island. Mr. Forshaw has
adopted a classification which recognizes three parrot familes in Australia.
This seems to be an upgrading of taxonomic subdivisions, of a type to
which specialists are particularly prone since they are more conscious of
the diversity of the group which they are studying, and may not recognize
its relative unity when compared with other groups. There are some
interesting regroupings. The Cockatiel is recognized as a cockatoo, the
Galah (Roseate Cockatoo to non- Australians) separated in the monotypic
genus Eolophus , and Bourke’s Parrot (they are called Parrots in this book,
which might help us to do away with that unfortunate term “ parrot-like ”)
is regarded as a dry-country Neophema species that has lost its green
colour, and it is placed in that genus.

The introduction discusses the habitat and has six pages of habitat
photographs. It also discusses distribution in general, but Spencer’s
classic concept of three zoogeographical sub-regions, shown on a map,
is probably obsolete since Keast has shown the situation to be much more
complex. There is also an introduction to the text layout, and a short
introductory section on keeping parrots in aviaries.

REVIEWS

8l

The main bulk of the text is devoted to individual species. These are
arranged in a systematic sequence. Each family, subfamily and genus
is introduced by a brief indication of their special features. Each species
has about three pages of text devoted to it, accompanied by a small map
of distribution and one, or in some cases two, full-page colour plates.
These plates are mostly close-up photographs of single birds, or more
rarely of pairs. These are fine detailed studio-type portraits, but I must
admit that I appreciated the occasional photograph from the natural
habitat, especially one of a Galah drinking, and I felt that some of the
size might have been sacrificed to include a picture of the plumage of the
young, or in some cases of the female which was not always included.
A few of the plates show evidence of poor colour values. Apart from the
transposed pictures of the two lorikeets, mentioned by the publishers,
there is another eiror in that the picture of the Twenty-eight Parrot is
not in fact that of the race semitorquatus , but a bird in mixed plumage,
probably from one of the areas in South-west Australia where the two
forms are interbreeding. The five paintings of J. C. Yrizarry illustrate
those species for which photographs are not available.

The great value of the text lies in the incorporation of up-to-date
information. A description of the adults of both species is given, but
the immatures are dismissed rather summarily. The distribution is
summarized in the text in addition to being shown on a map. The
various subspecies, where these exist, are described, and the ranges given.
The type of country occupied in various parts of the species range is
summarized under habitats, and a paragraph is devoted to its status, in
terms of abundance, within its range. The section on habits contains
information on the general behaviour, and in the more adequately studied
species summarizes the normal daily routine. In a few instances it
indicates the paucity of the data available. A section on movements is
particularly necessary on a continent where variable drought conditions
may cause many species to show seasonal or periodic movements within
their range, and allowance must be made for such movements when
evaluating a map of the overall distribution of a species.

The description of flight characters and voice are given, although these
are probably of greater value to the field observer than to the aviculturist.
The sections on feeding give information, mostly qualitative, on the food
taken; identifying many of the foodplants and indicating the variety of
the diet; combining both field observations and the examination of
stomach contents. In discussing breeding the displays are briefly
described and data on the nest, eggs, and behaviour during the breeding
period, and development of the young is given for each species. There
is a final short section on the keeping and breeding of the species under
aviary conditions, and the known hybrids are listed.

There is a useful bibliography at the end of the book, but there is no
indication of the fact that it is limited to the publications referred to in

H

82

REVIEWS

the text. It might have been made more useful to the user if it had
included a fuller list of at least the major publications on the Australian
parrots. The inclusion of a gazetteer is another helpful feature.

This is a very useful work and one that most aviculturists will want to
possess. In the circumstances the very high price is unfortunate. The
reviewer was interested to see a recent review in an Australian ornitholo¬
gical journal of Immelmann’s book on Australian parakeets. This costs
£2 and the reviewer commented that at this price only the most enthusiastic
parrot-lover would want to buy it. One wonders what he would have
said about the present work! Another cause for complaint is that the
large colour plates are stuck in individually on the back of pages of text,
being stuck along the top edge only. Users will find that as the book is
opened and closed the lower inner corners of the plates become bent in
and will have to be glued down if the book is not to acquire a dog-eared
appearance. Also the book is far thicker at the middle than at the edges
and is therefore difficult to handle, and if used frequently the binding at
the spine begins to show signs of strain. The layout of the text is lavish,
with plenty of spaces, and the section headings and maps considerably
reduce the amount of text on a page. One wonders whether with some
economies, and with something less of a coffee-table book as the ideal,
the publishers might not have produced a more reasonably-priced work
which would have reached more readers; and the last point is the crucial
one, for in the long run the value of a book must be judged to a large
extent by its availability to a large number of readers. In spite of such
criticisms it is still a work to be recommended, not only to aviculturists
but also to ornithologists in general and to the non-specialist bird-lover.

C.J. O.H.

# # #

FREMDLANDISCHE STUBENVOGEL (Foreign Cage and Aviary
Birds). By H. Dost. Published by Verlag Eugen Ulmer of
Stuttgart, Germany, 1969. Price D.M.980.

This excellent little book is one of series on animals (Ulmers Tier-
buchreihe). It deals with a very large number of birds, including
representatives from different families, that are commonly, or not-so-
commonly, kept in captivity. Many species of starlings, babblers, finches,
buntings, cardinals, flycatchers, thrushes, weavers, whydahs, tanagers,
etc., are dealt with and 72 of them are illustrated in colour.

The illustrations are adequate rather than superlative in quality but it
is nice to have so many of them. Some of the species chosen, such as the
Corsican Nuthatch Sitta whiteheadi , are hardly likely to flood the bird
markets in the foreseeable future (at least, I hope not). They have,
presumably, been chosen because there was much useful information
available on their behaviour and needs in captivity and this seems to me a
justifiable reason for including them.

REVIEWS

83

Each species is dealt with concisely but in some detail. General
information likely to be of use to the aviculturist is followed by dis¬
tribution; description, with age and sex differences ; voice; care needed in
captivity ; food ; and breeding. A really good feature is that full references
are given (cited in text and details at back of book) to accounts of successful
breeding, studies on the species in captivity and so on.

I assume that the waxbills and other estrildines are likely to be dealt
with in a separate volume in this series. Otherwise their complete
omission, except where some of them are named as hosts of the parasitic
Whydahs, would be unaccountable.

A minor defect of the book is that the index is not in alphabetical order,
the birds being listed in the same order as in the book, which rather
negates its purpose. All the same this is an interesting and useful book
that can be recommended to all who read German. D. G.

# # *

PAPAGEIEN IN HAUS UND GARTEN (Parrots in house and garden).
By W. de Grahl. 1969. Price D.M. 19-80.

This is another volume in the same series as the book reviewed above.
In my opinion it is a better one, perhaps I should say an even better one.
It differs by including much information about the ecology and habits of
parrots in a wild state. I hasten to add that I use the word “ parrots ”,
as does the author, to include all psittacines — lories, lorikeets, lovebirds,
typical parrots, parrakeets, cockatoos, the lot! (It is to be hoped,
incidently, that parrot-keepers will sooner or later come to their senses
and use the word “ parrot ” as one uses “ finch “ pigeon ”, “ bunting ”
and so on, and drop the misleading and cumbrous “ parrot-like ” at
present in vogue.)

To get back to my job of reviewing this useful and attractive little book.
Like its companion volume it contains concise but quite comprehensive
information about each species and how to keep and breed it, where such
information is known. Unlike the first book, however, it does have an
easy alphabetical index to both common and scientific names.

It is illustrated with many photographs of living birds, ten of them in
colour. There is a colour plate showing the identifying head and forepart
colour patterns of 18 species of Amazon parrots. The publisher’s
blurb on the back cover is painfully “ twee ” but it is most emphatically
not a sample of what is between the covers, which can be heartily recom¬
mended to all who read German and are interested in parrots (psittacines).

D. G.

84

CORRESPONDENCE

CORRESPONDENCE

MEAT AND PROTEIN FOOD FOR PARROTS

In view of some of the points raised in Mr. Smith’s letter below, we have asked
one or two other aviculturists for their experiences and will be glad to hear from
others regarding the use of meat and insects as food for parrots. My own experi¬
ence with a Little Corella was that it liked roots and root vegetables best ; and if not
carefully watched would climb up at meal times and gaily throw the meat off a
plate to get at the vegetables; but once its vegetable wants were satisfied it would
spend a little time delicately picking scraps of cooked meat from bones. The
recently published book on Australian Parrots by J. M. Forshaw gives some
references which relate to some of the points raised. The eating of wood-boring
grubs by Black Cockatoos is described, and reference is made to masses of pollen
in the stomach of a Purple-crowned Lorikeet, and to the eating of entire flowers
by Barrabands’ Parakeet (which Forshaw calls the Superb Parrot), and by the
Red-capped Parrot.

14 Dawlish Avenue, C. J. O. Harrison.

Perivale, Middlesex.

I often get for postmortem various parrots that sometimes between their demise
and my receipt have obviously been eaten by something or other. Even budgeri¬
gars, from well-inhabited flights, almost always have the exposed limbs “ chewed
down to the bone ” and possibly the head and some of the chest nibbled. I keep
Cyanoramphine parrakeets, and to me they are the most tractable of any psittacine
species. They may bicker; but a threat is as good as a fight and it is seldom if
ever that even a feather is lost when a hint to move away from a claimed nest-box
isn’t taken. The humorous quote originating from Canon Dutton, concerning
three New Zealand hen parrakeets who, to avoid spoiling a good friendship through
jealousy, combined together and killed and ate the single cock provided, has
always had me puzzled. Birds do differ such that no one can generalize about any
species; but a Cyanoramphus male’s beak would have been twice as large as a
female’s and, like birds of prey, this parrot genus has the hens one-third as small
again as their spouses. One often hears of murder and cannibalism in other sorts
of parrots, and I have always thought that Canon Dutton’s New Zealand hens
were grossly maligned.

New Zealand parakeets or, to be more specific, those two that inhabit the near-
Antarctic Antipodes and used to inhabit Macquarie Island are always stated to
eat a considerable quantity of dead penguin and seal-flesh. Keas, some at least,
seem to have taken to eating mutton live as well as dead. In captivity most parrots
and parrakeets will eat mealworms or maggots. The Keston Bird Farm used to
give boiled cod to their larger breeding parrots, and Black Cockatoos of the
Calyptorhynchus genus are reputed to eat the larvae of wood-boring beetles, while
doubtless there are other carnivorous tendencies in Psittacines.

What I have found most interesting in these early Avicultural Society magazines
are the references to meat-eating in this family of birds. In volume 2 of the first
series, in a letter, Mr. C. P. Arthur notes that Pennants, Crimson-wings, Kings,
Rosellas and Mealies all avidly took chopped fresh meat intended for a Jay that
shared their aviary. Most interestedly he then goes on to say that Grand Eclectus
Parrots are very fond of mice. Each of his specimens consuming two a day, when
he could procure them ! In volume 8, again of the first series, Mr. T. B. Whytehead
writes to tell of a cockatiel, that least malevolent of parrots, which ate the head
off a mouse that it had, presumably, caught in its cage.

The diets of wild parrots are not well understood. I know that crop analysis
has been undertaken ; but seeds are shelled and other, softer, matter is well masti¬
cated. Do Lories for example eat the insects that must be as attracted to the
honey-bearing trees as the birds are? Nectar is not a sufficient complete diet —
it is, after all only a solution of sucrose, glucose and/or fructose. Or do Lories
digest the pollen as well — like bees (Bees feed the larvae on pollen, honey is only
used to supply energy to the adult bees)? And what do Lorikeets eat when the
trees aren’t blooming? I have seen Platycercines, in an aviary, chewing away on
an earthworm like a child with a “ liquorice bootlace ” ; is this normal or abnormal
behaviour? Sidney Porter writing somewhere in the magazine said that with a
large collection of diverse, extremely rare, Amazons when these were fed on a

CORRESPONDENCE

85

“ natural diet ” of fruit, vegetable and seed they started dying one by one. Yet
when put, partly out of boredom with the birds, into small cages and fed on seed
they stopped dying off. My own assumption would be that perhaps by then
he had “ naturally selected 55 and that what he had really shown was “ survival
of the fittest ”. In these early magazines, and for some later, should a bird die
or start feather-plucking, the food is immediately blamed be it sunflower, safflower
or hemp. And this blame becomes a correct diagnosis and woe betide anyone
who feeds birds differently from the author of the article. I wish that I had such
self-assurance in any of my diagnoses as to aetiology.

158 Broadway, G. A. Smith.

Peterborough.

There have been many discussions concerning the allegedly harmful effects of
feeding meat to parrots. Over the past ten years or so I have given my African
Grey Parrots a meaty bone for their supper, with no harmful effects, but on the
contrary they have yearly produced fine healthy youngsters.

I obtain from myj butcher lamb neck-bones, that have been boned from the
upper shoulder. There is not a lot of meat on them but the birds pick them clean.
I obtain these from my butcher once a week, when the boning is done, and chop
them into small pieces which the birds can handle comfortably. These are cooked
slowly for two hours in the oven in order to extract all the fat. I am quite convinced
that any harm that birds suffer from meat eating is because of the fat in the meat.

I keep the cooked bones in the refrigerator and each day those that are used are
warmed in the oven, since the birds much prefer a warm bone to a cold one.
When there are babies in the nest, and they smell the appetizing warm bones,
there is great excitement, the babies demanding to have their share quickly. If
only one pet bird is to be fed, it can be given a lamb chop or cutlet bone left from
the table, but again, no fat! I have seen people give parrots fatty bacon rinds and
other fatty meats, and I am quite convinced that it is for this reason they sometimes
experience trouble. A pet bird may also be given a chicken bone and will crack
the drumstick and relish the marrow. No pork bones should be given as these
are too rich and fatty.

Finally, I cannot stress too often, no fat!

Silver Springs, E. Wicks (Mrs.)

Beaufort Road,

St. Leonards-on-Sea, Sussex.

I understand that Mr. G. Smith has written enquiring about meat and proteins
in the diet of parrots, and perhaps the following notes based on my experiences
may be of interest to him.

With regard to Lories and Lorikeets I feel that there is no doubt at all that
live food is taken in considerable quantities, and in captivity mealworms are always
sucked dry, and never eaten whole. I do not think live food is essential to these
birds, but it certainly seems beneficial, and having found a satisfactory regimen of
feeding I am unwilling to change.

These are the only birds I keep on a strict diet consisting of Hastings Nectar
diluted with the juice from stewed dates and sultanas, mealworms, and a few grains
of soaked sunflower. I have had a pair of Yellow-backed Lories that have kept in
perfect condition for 11 years. This length of time is not unusual for these birds
which often seem to live to a great age, but I put them on this diet when I found
that they suffered from fits when kept on a more mixed fare. Friends who have
given these birds a wider variety of food seemed to lose their birds, so there was
not much point in trying further. I think that live food is most essential.

With regard to the ordinary parrots, Amazons, etc., there seems such a wide
variety of foods that must be eaten in the wild, and live food of a sort is probably
eaten. The one thing that is certain about wild parrots is that their natural diet
can bear little relationship to the food we give them in captivity. Some parrots
will take mealworms, and others are not interested at all. I always give my birds
nectar and soft food as well as seed, and many, particularly the Blue-headed, prefer
soft food every time.

The Australian Parakeets including the Budgerigar are definite live feeders when
given the chance, particularly when rearing, and they will eat a lot of mealworms
then. Budgerigars certainly need to see other birds feeding on them to encourage

86

CORRESPONDENCE

them to start, but once they acquire the habit they feed freely on live food. This
habit of the Australian Parakeets taking live food was, I think, confirmed on the
recent collecting expeditions undertaken by the Natural History Museum, South
Kensington.

The habit of the Kea Parrot of New Zealand in reputedly killing sheep for their
kidney fat is frequently quoted, and perhaps I may be pardoned for the following
notes, which, while not strictly speaking of avicultural interest, may warrant some
thought.

As a preamble may I mention that for over 40 years I have been connected with
the Australian and New Zealand wool trade, and in the course of this time I have
met many sheep farmers. Speaking generally this group of people once they get
beyond birds that are harmful to sheep or other forms of agriculture, take little
interest in birds.

A few years ago I was connected with a group of farmers who ran sheep in the
high country where Keas are found, and I never met one who had himself lost
sheep through these birds, or had actually seen a Kea attack one. All knew the
story and it was always “ Old Jim ” or “ Old Harry ” who had supposedly lost
sheep by this means. Eye-witnesses were, to me, non-existant. This does not
necessarily prove that the stories are unfounded, but I think that they may well
prove to be widely exaggerated.

It may be of interest if I give the results of my enquiries.

Until the introduction of pigs by Captain Cook in New Zealand, there were no
mammals there apart I believe from a few mice, and the Maoris who did not
settle in Kea country in any numbers. Prior to the arrival of the Maoris there
were a race of people there called Moa Hunters, but nobody seems to know
anything much about them. At any rate it seems more or less certain that there
were no mammals in New Zealand until comparatively recent times. The native
bush was therefore almost exclusively spread by means of birds, wind and insects.
It was the solid pathless masses of bush that made the first settlers fear it so, and
burn it off wherever possible. The Kea country was probably first put under
sheep about 120 years ago.

Keas are highly intelligent birds, physically very tough, and equipped with a
powerful beak. They also have a great sense of fun. One friend of mine used to
go and visit a relative who was working on the marvellous fiord road near Milford
Sound. The men were housed in wooden huts with corrugated iron roofs and
snow fell frequently. At dawn the camp was awakened by the Keas who flew down
to the ridge of the roof, and then slid down the slope for all the world like otters
or children.

The late Sydney Porter, who had a pair of these birds in an aviary with a running
stream spanned by a bridge found that the Keas dropped a tin in upstream, and
then ran across the bridge to see it come out the other side. That Keas are highly
mischievous is also true. If the hotels now opening in that area leave the windows
open and unguarded, Keas will get in and rip the place to pieces. The above
notes on the Keas’ mental make-up are important. I have always thought that
parrots, dogs and small children have a lot in common in what they find of interest.
That much of this is concerned with minor destruction is also a fact. I do not
know if we will ever see a parrot “ Demo ” — probably the activities of University
Students are a little beyond them !

I understand that the high country where Keas are found was first stocked with
Merino sheep from Australia, and the snow experience of these sheep would be
slight or non-existent. This is another point that gives a clue to the whole puzzling
business. The most likely explanation I heard was from a farmer who in the slump
of the 1930s was forced to work as a shepherd in very high rough country — too
rough to muster the sheep on horseback. All the work had to be done on foot.
Incidentally he earned 30 shillings a week for this gruelling work, which does not
seem much by present-day standards for this lonely and hazardous work. Many
sheep became bogged down in snow drifts, and unless the shepherd or his dogs
found them, which was not very likely, they died. This farmer suggested, and he
had no great natural history knowledge, that it was probably the struggling and
bleating of these sheep that brought the Keas down. Anyone who has kept mixed
collections of birds has seen how something unusual, a frog or a mouse will bring
all the birds down to look at it and the same thing applies if a bird catches itself
up anywhere in an aviary. Parrots particularly are very prone to attack anything
in difficulties.

CORRESPONDENCE

87

We therefore come to a situation where an alert active bird sees something of
which it has no race experience at all, struggling and crying in a snowdrift. What
is more natural than that the Keas should come down, and, if they found that the
strange object was harmless, should give it a hefty bite? The long powerful beak
of a Kea would rip a sheepskin easily enough. I do not know if the bit about the
kidney fat is factual, or is just a trimming. There is another theory that the birds
were first brought down to the drying frames where the skins of slaughtered sheep
were hung before shipment, but if this was the case I should think that it must
have been flies that they were after. The country lived in by the Keas is heavily
stocked with deer, but I have never heard of an attack on these animals. I suggest
that deer being more accustomed to snow do not often get bogged in snowdrifts.

I managed to get a friend of mine interested in the problem, and he arranged
a trip to try to get some facts. As he knew most of the station owners personally
it would have been a good test but unfortunately he died before he could undertake
the journey. Surely we have members in New Zealand who could track down this
fascinating story, and there must have been some research done on what has
become one of the main legends of ornithology. I may be wrong but I have a
feeling that this is a classic case of where an incident has been built up into a legend.

I may be wrong and the Keas may live on sheeps’ kidney fat, but if I know
anything of New Zealand sheep farmers, if there had been very much truth in
the story the Kea would have followed so many other New Zealand birds into
extinction before the turn of the century.

This story apparently started about the 1860-70S and it is as well to look at the
background of the whole thing. The South Island of New Zealand, or at any rate
the southern part of it, was colonized by Scots, men who in their native land had
had to cope with the attacks of eagles and foxes on their flocks. New Zealand
possessed neither of these, so any further predation was unduly obvious. It is
hard these days to realize the absolute isolation of these mountain sheep stations
in the early days. They are hard enough to travel in now but before the country
was widely settled the loneliness must have been frightening. The absence of
any wild animal or other human for many miles must have led to much family
talk over firesides and ideas must have become a matter of folklore, much as it was
in the Scottish Highlands. The general opinion nowadays of the Victorian woman
is of a frail fainting creature. This may have been the case with those in England,
but anyone who thinks that the women who opened up the country in Australia
and New Zealand, South Africa or South America were of that type would be well
advised to think again. One of the greatest hardships was lack of news or indeed
anything to think of but their daily hard round. The men always had things to
do away from the Station, but the women were literally tied down. Any story,
true or false was passed on, and in the absence of any firm news such stories as
that of the Kea were passed into folklore. If anybody can add to the foregoing,

I shall be pleased to hear.

While on the subject of New Zealand birds, I would mention that a colleague
of mine made a detailed tour of New Zealand Sheep Stations recently, and in the
course of this journey stayed at a Station in the South-East of the North Island
named Huiarau. This is an old established station, and is named after the Huia
bird. The name is pronounced hoo-yah. The Huia is, I believe, extinct or
nearly so, but its main claim to fame is that the birds possessed long ivory coloured
beaks, that of the cock being shorter and heavier for chopping open old logs, and
the hen having a longer probing bill. The bird is about 19 in. long.

The bird was apparently shot out as no Maori considered himself well dressed
without a Huia beak hanging on his watch chain. There is a rather curious
parallel here with the Ivory Billed Woodpecker of Florida which was driven to
near extinction for the same reason. Man has wiped out numerous species of
animals and birds for one reason or another, but these are the only two cases I
know of where birds were driven to extinction by male adornment.

Bracken, Herbert Murray.

Upper Cornsland,

Brentwood,

Essex.

The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles,
notes, or correspondence.

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS ACCOUNT

88

RECEIPTS ANN PAYMENTS ACCOUNT

o OOOOOONOO'O'Ow
mioTfO -i-O O vj N N O X O'

^00 IO00

NOO ntN M O H
vO n m N PH

vs CO

00

N V>

M PH

co O

•'i-

O' V)

Th

VO M

00

CO

CO

S3

rO

P

PL,

CO

C3 » — i

■as

c 3

£o

■f§ '

»S $

JIS1

*§ bO «

S c H
>«■§>
P

co X
<D <L>

£ c

<U h-4
X*'4-'

o

.5 ^3

to;

PQ

^ co „

~co ^*Vh 2

2 o

+3 G.g S

H P u £ <u t-i n

< C/3 Ph E C/3 pH w

• H C/J

o T3

C In

p g

al

<u

C

-3

s a %
o <u a>
<y »_ X ^

X

o
o
PQ

<u
P

cr

<u
xi
O

X

c

CCS

co

P
O
<d

o si
g^sl
° § s-J

QpqiIhS

<u

Sh

P

■M

-3

a

<u

Cd

X

W

s 5

u

_v O'

C v°
PQ^

Sh

-u <D
CCS X 1

g §
y u
s «

c3 l““l

«

^3

^3

I

tHMMvOXOOOO

t>* M \© V© 00 MVO o Tj-

oiOMVOrow v© O'

O' .

vD

O'

Us*'’*-*.*’

L

CCS

3 co

a be

c3 * ‘ * C • • co

►— > -3 co +?

^ « .&

^ CO -J 8

„ ■ • 2 • ££ • • V

Is .Hill §

«!alSi*<Sg*§

flj .tj* 0<-l-|C+Ht|_|C4_|OT £ CCS

y & * ° ° ° ° ts

G|»2(»COCOCOO^n

J2 x 5 jy ^ ^ > ‘> “

3 ^ ^ ^

mwQc/2c/2c/}cG<£Q2

This Statement has been prepared from the books, records and vouchers of the Avicultural Society, and is in accordance therewith.

When Visiting the

COTSWOLDS

AVICULTURISTS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

The Avicultural Society of America

Founded 1927

Hon. President: Dr. Jean Delacour.

President: Mr. Lynn Hall, Jr.

Secretary: Richard C. Frantzen,

13914 Don Julian Road, La Puente, California 91746, U.S.A.

The Society year begins January 1st, but new members may join
at any time and are entitled to the back issues of the AVICULTURAL
BULLETIN, Roster for the current year and a copy of the By Laws.
One membership includes husband and wife. The annual dues
for domestic (Canada & Mexico included) membership are $4.00.
Foreign dues are $5.00. Please send remittance to the Membership
Secretary, Mrs. Marian Wagner, 565 East Channel Rd., Santa
Monica, California 90402. Make your check payable to
Avicultural Society of America. Foreign applicants please remit
dues by International Bank Draft or Money Order only.

The Avicultural Society of South Australia

Founded 1928

The oldest Avicultural Society in Australia invites all interested in
aviculture to become members. Subscription is £ 1 5 s. 0 d. sterling
per annum, and this includes a monthly magazine Bird Keeping
in Australia mailed to all members. This is entirely original and deals
with the keeping and breeding of many Australian and exotic
species of birds.

Please forward membership application and subscription to the
Secretary, Eric Baxter, 17 Benjamin Street, Manningham,

South Australia, 5086.

The Avicultural Society of Australia

Catering for the English-speaking breeders of Australian birds
throughout the world. Monthly magazine Australian Aviculture
posted free to all members.

Overseas subscriptions : United States of America, $3.00;
all other countries, Aust. $2.50.

Secretary, Frank A. Ripper 10 Tyne Street, Burwood,

Victoria, 3125, Australia.

A Guide to the
Names of Parrots

A complete list of the scientific names admitted by
Peters, together with their derivations and
appropriate English names.

Price 5s. 6d post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

STUDIES ON GREAT CRESTED
GREBES

By

K. E. L. SIMMONS
Price 5/6 post free

o

PUBLISHED BY

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

GALLEY’S WOOD
EBENBRIDGE, KENT

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGS DEN BIRD GARDENS

The largest private collection of ornamental game birds in the
British Isles, also Waterfowl and Rare Breeds of Poultry, etc-

Open every day

10 a.m. to 7 p.m. or sunset if earlier

Send 3/- for a 40-page brochure

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422
The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Tel.: Oakley 2745

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY : 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier
PRICES OF ADMISSION

Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicultural Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 4s. (; non-members ) Children: 2/6

Parties of 25 and over: 2/6 each Organised school parties: 1/6 each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance

NO DOGS ALLOWED

HOW TO GET TO THE WILDLIFE PARK

For your
greater comfort ...

Stay at the

WINDSOR HOTEL

Lancaster Gate, London, W.2

Centrally placed for London’s famous parks,
fashionable West End shops, theatres and cinemas.

A quiet, friendly and gracious hotel, with comfortable
bar, near West London Air Terminal and Paddington
Station. Radio and Telephone in all 150 bedrooms,
many with bath and shower. Food and wines
excellent. Welcome to elegant London.

Reservations 01-262 4501

A KINGSLEY-WINDSOR HOTEL

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A36 at The Red Lion, Woolverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

OPEN DAILY
including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

No dogs admitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 326

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

{Established 1956)

Invites your membership. Subscription $2.00 Aust. Due on the
1 st January each year. Magazine dealing with all aspects of
aviculture posted each month. Back issues supplied where
available.

Send application to:

The Secretary: W. L. Burns, P.O. Box 55, Morley, 6062,
Western Australia.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the:

Hon Secretary, Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone: Henlow Camp 342

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members' advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement, which must be sent to A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column , but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable.

Wanted. Amherst’s Pheasant, 1969. Two cocks, one hen. Offers to “ D ”,
Avicultural Society, Galley’s Wood, Edenbridge, Kent.

Wanted. The Book of Duck Decoys , 1886, by Sir Ralph Payne- Gallwey;
British Duck Decoys of Today, 1918, by J. Whitaker.— -R. O. Smith, 359 Aldridge
Road, Perry Bar, Birmingham 22B.

Wanted. Avicultural Magazine, 1926, 7; 1927, complete; i960, 4. Also
interested in other complete volumes. Please send particulars of titles, years and
prices to: — P. H. Hastings, 182, Sultan Road, Portsmouth.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Stephen Andrew Duckett, to 9 Dandenong Road, Frankston East, Victoria 3199,
Australia.

Philip Harwood, to “Arnaroo ”, Gidgegannup, Western Australia.

Christian Krause, to P.O. Box 4860, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Maurice Yesson, to No. 2 Garden Flat, Oakhurst Court, Parabola Road, Chelten¬
ham, Gloucestershire.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

Donald L. Anderson, Leidy Lab. of Biology, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pa., 19104, U.S.A. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Dr. Mario Paulo Auiuori, Director, Parque Zoologico de Sao Paulo, Caixa
Postal 12,954, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Proposed by Dr. Philippe E. Beraut.
Werner Bokermann, Parque Zoologico de Sao Paulo, Caixa Postal 12,954, Sao
Paulo, Brazil. Proposed by Dr. Philippe E. Beraut.

The Marquess Douro, m.v.o., o.b.e., m.c., Estate Office, Stratfield Saye, Nr.

Reading, Berkshire. Proposed by Terry Jones.

N. N. W. Duce, Edward Street, Raceview, Ipswich, Queensland, Australia.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Earl I. Ham, H. & H. Aviaries, 4321 Tyndall Avenue, Victoria, B.C., Canada.
Proposed by Jan Roger van Oosten.

C. R. Lee, 27 North Street, Stanground, Peterborough, PE2 8HR. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

Dr. Neville Morgan, Greenlees, Lasswade, Midlothian, Scotland. Proposed
by Mrs. Geoffrey Schomberg.

Ronald Arthur Pendry, Spring Hill Farm, Forest Row, Sussex. Proposed by
Terry Jones.

William R. Proctor, Rt. 1 — Box 205, Medical Lake, Washington 99022, U.S.A.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

A. D. Raszewski, 15407-81 Avenue, Edmonton 51, Alberta, Canada. Proposed
by Miss K. Bonner.

Manfred F. Schweiger, D-75 Karlsruhe-Durlach, Dieselstr. 5, Germany.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Richard H. Woods, P.O. Box 393, Colona, Illinois 61241, U.S.A. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10-14
Macklin Street, London, W.C.2, to whom members should address all orders
for extra copies and back numbers. Subscription and back number orders from
non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., $6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wykeham
Press, 8$ High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained, price 15s. each, postage extra. Alternatively the
printers can undertake the binding of complete current volumes (for which they
have binding cases in stock), price £2 per volume, postage extra. They can
also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for which
binding cases have to be specially made), price £2 10s., postage extra. Members
are requested to state whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be
bound with the volume.

NEW MEMBERS

The 28 Candidates for Membership in the January-February 1970 number of
the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

AMENDED ADDRESSES

Professor Paolo Mantegazza, Tamagno 3, 20124-Milano, Italy.

Jack Herbert Rawlings, Broad Acres, Burwash Common, Etchingham, East
Sussex.

Richard G. L. Tilley, “ Niltava ”, 243 Avenue du Chene, Heusy-4802, Belgium.
Mrs. William M. Winsted, Mello-Tone Aviary, Star Rt. Box 150, Walton,
Oregon 97490, U.S.A.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Dr. Benjamin D. Blood, to 13 ch. du Champ D’Anier, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
John W. Bonny, to “ Redroofs ”, Les Traudes, St. Martins, Guernsey, Channel
Islands.

Martin Carslake, to 97 Northumberland Way, Northumberland Heath, Erith,
Kent.

Dr. Kai Curry-Lindahl, to Field Science Office of Africa, UNESCO House,
P.O. Box 30592, Nairobi, Kenya.

Norman Craig Lewis, to The Bungalow, Radio and Space Field Station, Drove
Road, Chilbolton, Hampshire.

Alexander H. Matheson, to Armana, 7-1. °, Lugo, Spain.

D. C. Page, to P.O. Box 2825, Windhoek, S.W. Africa.

READMITTED

Charles P. Guy, Lamorna Farm, Ridge Road, Combe in Teignhead, Newton
Abbot.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

Mrs. M. D. Allfrey, Chacombe Priory, Banbury, Oxon. Proposed by Miss
K. Bonner.

Mrs. V. Astley-Rushton, Cothay Manor, Greenham, Wellington, Somerset.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Alan Bailey, 19 Leonard Street, Sutton, St. Helen’s, Lancs. Proposed by
Peter Howe.

Mrs. D. Balcon, 39 Hillingdon Gardens, Woodford Green, Essex. Proposed
by D. Reid-Henry.

C. J. Bock, 61 Gavan Street, Bundaberg, Queensland, Australia. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

Keith Bromley, Ashley Manor, King’s Somborne, Stockbridge, Hampshire.
Proposed by Terry Jones.

G. O. Brown, Gray-Dawn Bird Farm, P.O. Box 7182, Port Elizabeth, Republic
of South Africa. Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Christopher Stewart Buckle, “ Fladgates ”, Slinfold, Horsham, Sussex.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Bertram Sidney Cannell, Woodmancote Place, Woodmancote, Henfield, Sussex.
Proposed by A. J. Lambert.

James Keith Collins, 4 The Street, White Notley, Witham, Essex. Proposed
by W. G. Last.

Alexander Dalgarno, Parceval Hall Gardens, Appletreewick, Nr. Skipton,
Yorks. Proposed by P. B. Brown.

J. Dingemans, Blauwhandstraat 10, Bergen op Zoom, Holland. Proposed by
A. Rutgers.

Thomas Allan George Gibson, 4 St, Davids Avenue, Warmley, Bristol, Proposed
by A, A. Prestwich.

E . H. Grosvenor, Woodthorpe Hall, Old Tupton, Derbyshire. Proposed by
Terry Jones.

Niles H. Hagedorn, 8753 Leona Avenue, Leona Valley, California 93550, U.S.A.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich,

Tasman R. Hill, 195 Bayswater Road, North Bayswater, Victoria, Australia.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

David Holyoak, 13 Ellison Road, London, S.W.16, Proposed by C. J. O.
Harrison.

E. Horemans, 15 Spoorwegstraat, 2410 Herentals, Belgium. Proposed by Dr.
L. A. Swaenepoel.

Arthur Humbert, Manor Farm, Kimbridge, Romsey, Hampshire. Proposed by
Terry Jones.

Richard M. Jakob, Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust, Les Augr6s Manor,
Trinity, Jersey, Channel Islands. Proposed by J. J. Mallet.

Lennart C.-O. Lyberg, Goketorpsgatan 21, S-416 56 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Proposed by T. R. M. Brosset.

K. G. Marchant, Thatchers Restaurant, East Horsley, Surrey. Proposed by
Terry Jones.

Jeffry May, i i Hardwick Road, Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

P. D. Muller, i Market Place, Pickering, Yorks. Proposed by F. H. H. Reitz.
Miss Jeanne Notley, Cotchet Farm, Blackdown, Haslemere, Surrey. Proposed
by Miss E. Locker Lampson.

Robert E. Otis, Psychology Dept., Michigan State University, E. Lansing,
Michigan 48823, U.S.A. Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Mrs. Brenda Rhodes, 6 Finkle Street, Sowerby, Sowerby Bridge, Yorkshire.
Proposed by Clifford Smith.

Mrs. A. Rillieux, 5323 St. Anthony Avenue, New Orleans, La. 70122, U.S.A.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

J. E. R. Robertson, Brickwall Farm, Maldon Road, Stanway, Colchester, Essex.
Proposed by K. J. Lawrence.

S. M. Rowan, 12 Upper Brook Street, London, W.i. Proposed by W. J. Bourne.
Dr. Alfred Seitz, Jochensteinstr. 8, 85 Nuernberg (Zabo), West Germany.
Proposed by Dr. H. G. Klos.

Daniel P. Shearing, Corner Cottage, Woodlands Lane, Stoke d’Abernon,
Cobham, Surrey. Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Jeffrey Taylor, 390 Peppard Road, Emmer Green, Reading. Proposed by
Robert Gillmor.

H. W. Wareman, van Opbergenstraat 20, Rotterdam 14, Holland. Proposed by
Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel.

D. J. Warren, 14 Dorset Close, Broadway, Frome, Somerset. Proposed by
Michael Curzon.

Thomas L. Wilkinson, 1515 E. 53rd Street North, Wichita, Kansas 67219,
U.S.A. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Ewart Williams, Bonners, Hambledon, Surrey. Proposed by Dr. J. R. Hodges.
Ralph U. Zachrisson, Box 4550, S-423 00 Torslanda, Sweden. Proposed by
T. R. M. Brosset.

DONATIONS
(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

I. A. Aird
A. G. Arcq
G. Balderson

F. W. Behrent

G. C. Bullock

L. W. Cahill

M. K. Clark
G. Detry

D. F. Dewey
F. Dutton

W. Hacker

Dr. J. R. Hodges

J. W. Hudson

N. V. Hunloke

G. T. Irving

Dr. S. B. Kendall

Miss E. Locker Lampson

P. A. Lindsay

F. W. Shaw Mayer

P. G. Paris

G. R. Pryor
Dr. H-S. Raethel
D. H. S. Risdon
R. Russell

F. L. Smith

G. A. Smith
R. O. Smith

H. A. Snazle
J. H. Swift

J. O. Wahlgren

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

//'A 3

jTf %.'*£> S' fX
8)RJ>i

AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 3
MAY— JUNE
1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

PAGE

The Natal Pygmy Kingfisher ( Ispidina picta) (with coloured plate), by

D. M. Reid-Henry . 89

Indian Ringnecked Parrakeets ( Psittacula krameri manillensis)y by Dr. L. A.

SWAENEPOEL .......... 92

Breeding the Fire-fronted Bishop ( Euplectes diademata ), by E. Ngrgaard-

Olesen . 94

The Red-capped Parrot ( Pionopsitta pileata), by Rosemary Low . . 96

The Behaviour of Captive Purple Gallinules ( Porphyrio porphyrio ), by
D. T. Holyoak . 98

Instant Planted Aviaries, by T. S. Thomson . . . . ,110

The Winged World in 1969, by Clive Roots . . . . .114

Rothschild’s Mynah ( Leucopsar rothschildi ), Report by D. T. Spilsbury . 115

Breeding Results in The Norfolk Wildlife Park, by Philip Wayre . . 129

Council Meeting . . . . . . . . . .131

British Aviculturists’ Club . . . . . . . . .132

News and Views . . . . . . . . . . 132

Review ............ 136

the avicultural society

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £ 2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, M.B.E., 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.
Assistant Editor: C. J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

ssssr

Avicult. Mag.

Natal Pygmy Kingfisher

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 76. — No. 3. — All rights reserved. MAY-JUNE 1970

THE NATAL PYGMY KINGFISHER

( Ispidina picta)

By D. M. Reid-Henry (Woodford Green, Essex, England)

There are two species of tiny kingfishers in Southern Africa which can be
confused in a casual examination. They are the Malachite kingfisher,
Corythornis cristata (Pallas) and the Pygmy kingfisher, Ispidina picta
(Boddaert).

It is with this latter that we are now concerned, and particularly with
the race natalensis. Briefly the main difference is in a matter of habitat.
The Malachite kingfisher is a bird of the rivers and the environs of open
stretches of water, whilst the Pygmy kingfisher is predominantly a dry-
country bird feeding mostly on grasshoppers, tiny lizards, caterpillars,
beetles and the like, often very far from any water.

Its nest is in the typical hole in some earthy bank, and is in every respect
similar to that of almost any other member of the family, but the site
chosen is more often the side of a termite mound into which the bird
excavates the tunnel, rather than the softer, sandier site of a river bank.

The extra work involved in digging a hole through a hard sun-baked
surface finds its effect in the greater wearing down of the bill, for it is very
noticeable how short the beak of this bird is compared to that of a
Malachite kingfisher In captivity when the bird is relieved of all this
hard work, the beak quickly becomes overgrown and out of character,
despite the lesser work involved in smacking its bill against a perch in order
to stun its food, which kingfishers always do!

There is not much of a white patch on the lower cheek where the
Malachite carries a considerable flash, and the back of the neck is chestnut
where the Malachite is blue-violet. However, there is only an iridiscent
small blue patch below the ear-coverts, whereas the whole of the side of
the Malachite’s head above the eye is blue-mauve or violet.

It is on the crown that the main obvious difference is to be seen; for the
Malachite kingfisher erects an extraordinary barred and tipped black
shaped tiara of long emerald green crest-feathers, in moments of excite¬
ment. The Pygmy kingfisher wears no such adornment but instead its
crown centre from bill to nape is rich ultramarine blue barred with black.
They are both most beautiful little birds.

The Pygmy kingfisher is much addicted to migrating at night and
frequently is attracted towards lighted windows, where it often either
enters houses, if the windows are open, or breaks its neck against the glass.

I

9°

D. M. REID-HENRY — THE NATAL PYGMY KINGFISHER

In one case I was told about the bird that flew into an African’s house and
was promptly skinned and eaten as part of the man’s supper!

In another case the bird was taken alive and unharmed to school by
a small boy who wanted to give it to his nature-study teacher. This lady
brought it along to me in a shoe-box and I agreed to have some decent
accommodation made and look after it.

I would like to describe the cage I had made for this bird in some detail
because it has served me well for several purposes. It was made strongly
so as to serve as a packing case as well as for other purposes. The top,
when it is used as a cage is a fine mosquito mesh of copper wire, whilst
the front is a sliding sheet of plate-glass, going into position from the top.
The door is the side which opens as two wings and which can be screwed
in solidly, or left as a door as required. The rest of the construction is
of oil-bound hardboard on a stout wooden frame. It serves equally
well as a cage for birds or insects, whilst the overall size is enough to give
a lot of room.

The floor I covered with dead leaves and sand and I placed a water
container and the daily ration of live insects, geckoes, etc., inside by
simply lifting the glass front a few inches. Perches were natural branches
which were laid on the floor so that the twigs could stand up in interesting
positions to show off the bird.

In this cage I kept the kingfisher for about six months until it was time
to return to England, when I took him out into the bush and let him go.

Feeding involved a daily stint with a butterfly net in the vlei to catch
grasshoppers. Another stint with the net indoors after sundown brought
me a ready harvest of moths and beetles. I found it astonishing to see
how large an insect this tiny bird could swallow: large moths of the
common sort would be divested of their wings and then swallowed
without difficulty, but there was a danger from large and powerful grass¬
hoppers whose enormous kicking power had to be curtailed for fear of the
little bird’s losing an eye.

Whilst this bird is as I have said a species of the dry country in the
main, he was very keen to take several baths a day and was always ready
to retrieve any food from under water, and I believe its dry-country
habitat is a comparatively recent adaptation. There are other kingfishers
in Africa and Asia which behave in exactly the same way.

It is evident that as a family kingfishers are very adaptable to change
in dietary habits, but they have little stamina to withstand cold or the
effects of prolonged fasting.

In general they are peaceable birds and may be kept in company with
other species without danger. I look forward to a time when it will be
possible for me to keep some of the other African species and compare
my notes.

Certainly I have found kingfishers always rewarding in every way and
look back on this particular bird with great pleasure, counting myself

D. M. REID -HENRY — THE NATAL PYGMY KINGFISHER

91

singularly fortunate in having had the opportunity to study such an
interesting bird so closely for so long.

He could stand up and look as thin as the proverbial rake, or he could
sit down and look almost spherical in shape. I never saw him sit on one
foot, and because of their shape and structure it would not seem possible
to maintain the position for long. Their feet are short and set widely
apart so that it would seem hard to balance the centre of gravity over one
foot. I have kept several kingfishers as opportunity came, and I have
never to my recollection ever observed them to sit other than on both feet,
except to scratch their heads, or to stretch. Another reason why such a
posture would be difficult lies with the structure of the toes. Like all
members of the order Coraciiformes the proximal half of their outer toes
are stuck together with the middle toes in a common sheath and so cannot
be spread out to distribute weight. Hoopoes, by the way, do not have
the same degree of restriction as most other members of the order.

It is a matter of wonder to me that birds with such beautiful plumage
as kingfishers can bring up their young in the squalid conditions of the
nest-hole. All the kingfishers, hoopoes, bee-eaters, rollers and hornbills
whose domestic arrangements I have studied are united in their
indifference to filth of the most offensive kind. One would imagine, if in
ignorance of the provision of nature against it, that tiny growing feathers
would become ruined by ordure long before the time came for their
owners to leave the nest, but the truth of the matter is that these birds
retain the spiny sheath in which the feather is encased during growth until
almost the time when they are fully grown. Thus they are wonderfully
preserved from contamination, and the plumage breaks out of the sheath
only when the young birds are nearly ready to leave. They emerge from
the tunnel all with unspoiled feathers and thereafter sit around on perches
near to the tunnel entrance whilst awaiting food from their very industrious
parents.

Unlike the passerine birds which bring at one visit enough food to
supply morsels to each of their offspring, kingfishers usually can feed
only one youngster at each visit. On the other hand, there is usually much
more substance in one feed to a kingfisher than in one mouthful to a
thrush. Nonetheless, the comings and goings of parents of these birds are
very busy affairs and the industry prodigious, for the number of young in a
brood is high. In the case of the Pygmy kingfisher the brood is, according
to Roberts four to six, but in some other species the number is frequently
eight or even more. As is so often the case there are casualties in the nest,
and not all eggs laid actually hatch. Of those that do, some young get
neglected and die, but the quantity of insects, particularly grasshoppers
consumed by the survivors must be great.

One is disturbed to learn that the use of DDT is on the increase in
various parts of Africa in an attempt to clear areas of harmful insects,
but the damage to beneficial birds may well be a far greater evil in the end.

92

L. A. SWAENEPOEL — INDIAN RINGNECKED PARRAKEETS

INDIAN RINGNECKED PARRAKEETS

( Psittacula krameri manillensis)

By Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel (Lembeek, Belgium)

Indian Ringnecked Parrakeets, and indeed all the allied species, have
always been great favourites of ours. Most of all, however, our hearts
are sold to the beautiful mutations of Psittacula krameri manillensis.

We used to be the very proud owners of a pair of blue Ringnecks, who
gave us three lovely youngsters in 1967 and again in 1968. Last year,
however, the hen went down very early — as she usually did — but only
one egg of the clutch of four was fertile. This hatched on 10th April,
when it was bitterly cold after a deceiving spell of sunny Spring weather.
This youngster died at the age of 10 days. It did not thrive well during
the last two or three days, and I had no opportunity to put it under another
hen. On the other hand, I was loathe to bring the baby in into the trust¬
worthy hands of my wife, as I did not wish to wear her out so early in the
year. As a matter of fact, she was put to very good use some months
later, to try her hand at rearing Kings from the egg.

As it was, the old blue Ringneck hen went down a second time. All four
eggs of this most unusual second clutch were fertile, and expectations were
high. On 8th June, the hen was found dead in the nest. The eggs,
due to hatch on 10th June, were tried out under Cockatiels, but unhappily
all were dead in shell.

Post-mortem of the hen showed a huge haemorrhage in the lungs, in
the abdominal cavity and in the crop. Apparently, the right atrium
of the heart had burst. This hen died as the perfect symbol of the
excellent mother : she had been covering the eggs even while her body grew
cold and was discovered in the attitude of brooding.

Bearing in mind that one pair of a certain species — or of a mutation
thereof — is a very poor and hazardous way to success and to build up a
breeding strain, we had paired up several other birds. Two acquired
split blue cocks 1967 were paired up to two of our own bred hens of that
same year. The blue hens seemed a certainty: anyone could easily tell
the more slender bills, the differences in the size and shape of the heads,
the more elegant feet and also a decidedly different hue of the iris. The
behaviour, too (many times observed), pointed the same way: the hens
always sat close to the cocks, and we were delighted to possess such well
behaved and loving young pairs.

Being of a rather impatient nature, I had, on several occasions, plucked
some small feathers in the nape of each one of these four birds, so as to see
if new feathering would show a trace of the black collar of the male.

L. A. SWAENEPOEL — INDIAN RINGNECKED PARRAKEETS

93

The green split blue cocks showed some of this male colouring in the
autumn of 1968, but the two blue hens, true to my expectations, grew
back the blue female feathers, even when I plucked their napes in March
1969. I must confess, that I was gradually becoming prouder in my
abilities for sexing immature Ringnecks. The two young pairs did not
visit the provided nests, as we had hoped ; still, one must not be too severe
with two-year-old Ringnecks.

However, in the moult of 1969, the two blue hens grew themselves a
lovely black collar; those two simulators have, since then, been two lovely,
lively cocks.

In the meantime, we had built up another pair of blue Ringnecks;
unrelated 1968 birds of our own breeding. The supposed hen of this
young pair eventually suffered from a very bad moult, for which I have
found no explanation ; in fact, she went nearly bald in a few months time.
No sign of plucking nor of new growing feathers, in spite of a varied diet
and a supply of vitamins. I found her dead, nearly-naked body hanging
on the wire netting on a cold August morning. Indeed, post-mortem
showed that she was a hen. The remaining 1968 bird that had been
living in the same aviary, looks like a cock though no ring is as yet visible.
Still, I’d not take a bet on him!

Our last pair of this mutation consists of a blue hen with a broken and
partly overgrown lower mandible, probably due to an accident when she
was quite young. Occasionally, we have to catch her in order to clip the
broken part of this lower mandible. She can feed all right and is in good
condition, but apparently she is unable to feed a baby: on two occasions,
she had newly hatched youngsters that died with an empty crop. Her
mate is a green cock split for blue and for lutino ; he was loaned to us by a
friend. In 1966 and 1967 this pair were living at our friend’s establish¬
ment; both years they had fertile eggs which never hatched. On taking
them over to our aviaries, we decided to foster her eggs out with a reliable
pair of normal green Ringnecks, excellent parents, while the blue hen was
able to brood the green’s eggs, with no results.

In 1968 we reared from this pair two blue youngsers, the third egg being
infertile. This made it easy to divide the clutch, sticking to the breeding-
terms.

In 1969 this pair had again three eggs, one of which was clear. Upon
hatching under the normal green hen, on 26th April 1969 we noted a
black-eyed and a red-eyed baby. Then the suspense started! Would
the red-eyed baby turn out to be an albino? I wonder if any nest has
ever been so closely surveyed. We had to wait about three weeks,
wondering if the first pin-feathers were going to be white or yellow and,
in the end, hardly believing that they were white, indeed! This albino
baby, a hen of course, grew in a most lovely way; indeed, she has always,
from hatching, been taller and heavier than her green brother (?). Having
heard of the mishap of Mr. Rudkin, when he bred his first specimen of

94

L. A. SWAENEPOEL — INDIAN RINGNECKED PARRAKEETS

albino Ringneck in California some years ago, and unwilling to risk its
being killed by the foster-parents, the albino and the green were taken out
of the nest at the age of four weeks, the albino showing a very slight sign
of feather-plucking on the back. My wife hand-reared them nicely.
They are very easy and gentle birds, and hand-rearing was no trouble at
all. It is perhaps interesting to note that the albino when feeding had
the crouching attitude of a female, while her green brother (?) stretched
head and neck to be fed. Weights were respectively 165 gm. (for the
albino) and 140 gm, on 25th May 1969, the day after the babies were taken
into the house. They learned gradually to feed, first in a big cage and
later in an inside aviary, they were then put into an outside aviary where
the lovely tame youngsters turned into rather mistrusting birds.

The albino hen and her green split blue brother (?) — he might be split
for lutino, too— are now out of the country in our friend’s collection.
The albino is, of course, not a common bird and, to our knowledge, the
fourth ever bred. Mr. Rudkin had one killed in the nest some years ago
but managed to breed a new one in 1968, I believe. Another one was
previously reared at Keston Bird Farm but was lost after some months.

We hope to breed more of this lovely mutation and eventually to be able
to build up a strain of them. The hen is pure white with red eyes, rosy
beak without any trace of black and chalk-white feet. The cock should
show a black collar, presumably with a rosy lining.

In the meantime we are much in trouble with our blue and split blue
cocks, for which blue partners do not seem available nowadays. We have
written many letters, but to no avail up till now. We are really feeling
rather “ blue ” about it!

BREEDING THE FIRE-FRONTED BISHOP

( Euplectes diademata )

By E. Ngrgaard-Olesen (Janderup, Denmark)

For the last three years I have been the happy owner of these small,
beautiful weavers, the Fire-fronted Bishops, Euplectes diademata. The
male in breeding plumage has a reddish-orange forehead, the rest of the
head, neck and underside black, wings blackish with feathers edged with
yellow or buff, the tail ashy and the under-tail coverts golden-yellow.
The bill is black. The female has the typical streaky plumage of a weaver,
streaked buff and black above; throat, upper breast and flanks buff with
some darker buff streaking, and lower breast and belly white. The
primaries show yellow edges. The bill is horn-coloured. The non¬
breeding plumage of the male resembles that of the female. In the wilds
this species occurs in a limited area of eastern Kenva and Tanzania.

E. N0RGAARD-OLESEN — BREEDING THE FIRE-FRONTED BISHOP

95

According to Mackworth-Praed and Grant ( Birds of Eastern and North¬
eastern Africa , vol. 2 (1955)), the eggs, nest and habits of this species are
undescribed.

In 1968 I discovered a nest containing a single egg in the outdoor
aviary, but I never found out which bird had made it. This outside
aviary measures 4x5x2^ m., and the ground inside is covered with
grass except for a third which is covered with a Juniperus chinensis. There
are several branches of elm in it. There is an inside aviary, 2 x 2 x 2-5 m.,
and in addition the birds also have access to a greenhouse, 3 x 1*5 x 2-5 m.
The greenhouse is planted with vines and wildflowers. During the
winter the birds are housed in the inside aviary.

At the end of May 1969 there was another nest, this time containing
two eggs, plain turquoise blue, and I later discovered that the bishops
were the owners. The nest was made of coconut-fibre. The only other
material available to them was the grass and they used a little of this.
At first it was possible to see the eggs easily through the nest, but gradually
more fibres were added, until it was difficult to spot them. During
incubation the male would eagerly follow the female when she was out
of the nest, apparently trying to drive her back again, but she would not
go to the nest in my presence.

At last one young one left the nest. It was similar to the female in
appearance, only a little paler, and with an almost white bill. I estimated
that the incubation took about 14 days and the young left the nest when
about three weeks old. The food consisted of a mixture of seeds and
mealworms. The food available in the aviary was a seed mixture of
many kinds of millets, canary seed, and grass-seed. As they share the
aviary with different fruit-eating species they also had access to fruit and
nectar, but I do not think they used much of this ; nor did they appear to
touch the green plants much, but with other birds present it was difficult
to observe the feeding habits. By November it was apparent that the
young one was a male and it was beginning to weave nests, but was still
in juvenile plumage, and at present (January 1970) has not yet moulted
into breeding plumage.

96

ROSEMARY LOW — THE RED-CAPPED PARROT

THE RED-CAPPED PARROT

( Pionopsitta pileata)

By Rosemary Low (Sidcup, Kent, England)

At the end of May 1969 I was offered three little parrots, of whose
identity I was at first uncertain, until I remembered a plate in the
Avicultural Magazine for October 1905. On reference to H. Good-
child’s beautifully drawn and coloured illustration, I was able to identify
them as Red-capped Parrots Pionopsitta pileata — two males and a female,
I believed. The “ female ” unfortunately moulted out into a male.

In appearance these parrots are not unlike a large Abyssinian Lovebird,
the male being green, darker above, with the forehead and part of the
crown scarlet, with a little scarlet surrounding the eye. The ear coverts
are very faintly tinged with red. The outer edge of the wing, the pri¬
maries, and the tail are tinged with blue. The immature cock has no red
on the head, except the faint tinge on the ear coverts. The adult hen also
lacks the red forehead but may be distinguished from immature birds by a
small area of blue on the forehead, which is not very pronounced. The
total length is only 8 in., the body being rather plump, the tail short and
square.

The London Zoo exhibited this species as long ago as i8yy and sub¬
sequently in 1883, and 1894 or 1895. I can trace records of only two
other importations into Britain. In 1904 F. C. Thorpe of Hull imported
several, one of which was exhibited at the Crystal Palace show that year,
gaining a fourth prize. In 1905 there were a pair at London Zoo and a
single male in the possession of Hubert Astley, presumably from this con¬
signment of Thorpe’s. In 1923 Astley received two pairs and com¬
mented (Avicult. Mag., September 1923, page 2iy) that he believed that
none had been imported since 1905.

I was therefore congratulating myself on having acquired these little
rarities when, two or three weeks later, about 20 more turned up.
Unfortunately, several fanciers who had pairs of these birds lost them
almost at once. I did acquire an adult hen from this consignment, a very
nervous bird unlike the three cocks who are exceedingly steady, but she
died after three months.

A veterinary surgeon and fellow member of the Avicultural Society
kindly carried out a post-mortem on the bird for me and concluded that
death was due to lack of vitamin A, associated with a secondaiy yeast
infection.

It therefore follows that a varied and nutritious diet with added vitamins
is essential. All my birds have 44 nectar ” which is made from half a pint
of hot water to which has been added three teaspoonfuls of honey, two of
rose-hip syrup, one of Cytacon (vitamin B12) and a few drops of ABIDEC

ROSEMARY LOW— -THE RED-CAPPED PARROT

97

(multivitamin solution). The nectar is eagerly taken by the Red-caps,
also grapes and apple, and any wild or cultivated greenfood in season,
as well as most other fruits which are offered.

They are very fond of spray millet, also peanuts, sunflower and canary
seed but they ignore white millet and hemp.

They are very sociable little birds, rather like Budgerigars in their
behaviour in that they constantly preen each other and warble in their
soft, inoffensive voices; but, unlike Budgerigars, they are gentle, sweet-
tempered and peaceable. They are therefore quite perfect birds for
keeping as pets. A single young one would undoubtedly quickly become
tame, for they appear to have little fear of people.

I put the three cocks in an outdoor aviary in June, where they seemed
quite happy in all kinds of weather. In November I transferred them
to an eight-foot flight in an outdoor birdroom so that they should have the
benefit of electric light and longer feeding hours. Later in November,
one of them begun to show the same disease symptoms as the hen which
had died — tail pumping and a slight discharge from the nostrils. The
temperature was around 38°F at the time so I brought the bird indoors to a
living-room temperature. It soon recovered and appeared quite normal
but when I returned it to the outdoor birdroom, the tail pumping started
almost immediately.

It would appear that this species is not really hardy so I caught up all
three birds. They have spent the winter indoors and appear very fit
and healthy. A pair in the possession of another fancier also showed
signs of discomfort in cold weather and were brought indoors for the
winter. It therefore seems that these little parrots should not be subjected
to the vagaries and variations of an English winter outdoors.

This species is a native of the forest regions of south-east Brazil and
Paraguay. It is to be hoped that all those fortunate enough to have pairs
in their possession will do their utmost to breed from them, although
I doubt that a single pair would go to nest. Sociable birds such as these
normally need the stimulus of the presence of at least one other pair. It
would be a great shame if last year’s consignment proved to be an
isolated one.

98 D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

THE BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE
GALLINULES

( Porphyrio porphyrio)

By D. T. Holyoak (London, England)

The Purple Gallinule is a bird of extensive reed swamps and other dense
vegetation of waterside habitats, and the difficulties of observation of
this species in the wild have prevented studies of its behaviour. A popu¬
lation of from seven to nine individual Gallinules is kept with many other
birds in the huge Snowdon Aviary at the London Zoo. These captive
birds live in an open grassy area so that prolonged observations on their
behaviour are readily made. This article summarizes information
obtained by watching them at intervals from January 1969 to February
1970. Most of the observations were made on the grey-headed sub¬
species (P. p. poliocephalus ), but less detailed observations were made on
the blue-headed, green-backed subspecies (P. p. madagascariensis) kept
in a smaller enclosure. The behaviour of the two subspecies appeared
to be identical.

Purple Gallinules are long-legged, chicken-sized rails, with bluish
plumage, heavy red bill, red frontal shield and reddish legs. The various
subspecies are distributed from Spain, Africa and Asia to Australia and
New Zealand, occurring mainly in extensive reed swamps and other semi-
aquatic habitats, but sometimes in drier areas. Gallinules walk and run
strongly, although their flight is rather weak with trailing legs. They
swim strongly, but apparently only do so when pressed to escape (Falla
et al. 1966, Ali and Ripley 1969).

From the literature they would appear to be social birds, usually seen
in parties or flocks, and Harrison (1970) has given evidence from the same
captive birds as I studied showing that more than two birds are often
involved in single nesting attempts. The captive birds studied appear to
call less often and less noisily than this species is reported to do in the wild
(Oliver 1955, Mackworth-Praed and Grant 1957, Falla et ah 1966, Ali
and Ripley 1969), probably because social contact is possible in their
open, grassy enclosure with less frequent vocalisations than are needed in
their natural habitats. But for this difference, and certain differences in
their feeding behaviour (see below), there is little reason to suspect that
the behaviour of these birds differs much from that of wild Gallinules.

Maintenance Behaviour

Gallinules use similar behaviour patterns in caring for their plumage
and soft parts to many other water and marsh birds, but they do show
some noteworthy peculiarities. They bathe standing in shallow water,
by making ducking movements of the head in bursts alternating with

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES 99

Fig. A. Anointing the insides of the primary feather tips with preen oil

(see text).

Fig. B. Sun-bathing posture, medium intensity.

bursts of flapping the part-opened wings. Coots ( Fulica atra) and
Moorhens ( Gallinula chloropus) also bathe when standing with their feet
on the bottom of breast-deep water, resembling the less aquatic Water
Rail ( Rallus aquaticus), African Black Crake ( Limnocorax flavirostris ) and
Tasmanian Native Hen ( Tribonyx mortieri) in this, but differing from
ducks, grebes and other water birds.

After bathing they leave the water to preen and oil the plumage.
Shaking movements are usually made first, then the bird nibbles its oil
gland, often making rapid drinking movements in short series; then it
systematically applies preen oil to the scapulars, mantle and body feathers,
as it rearranges them. The tips of the part-opened wings are usually
rubbed over the preen gland, apparently to oil these inaccessible parts of
the body (Fig. A). The head is preened by scratching with the foot
(lifted under the closed wing), only the claw of the middle toe being used.
The feet are cleaned by nibbling with the bill, and the bill is wiped (some¬
times rubbed) against projections, occasionally scratched with the foot as
in head scratching.

Sun-bathing is commonly performed whenever the weather is at all
bright, especially after bathing and the subsequent bout of oiling and
preening. Sun-bathing Gallinules stand in a peculiar position with the
wings extended, part-closed, on each side of the tail, or twisted downwards,
or in positions intermediate between these (Fig. B). Ali and Ripley
(loc. cit.) note that in India this species often clambers up reeds to sun¬
bathe in groups on misty mornings. Sun-bathing is often followed by
preening and oiling of the plumage, even when bathing in water has not
been carried out. Peculiar sun-bathing postures similar to those of
Gallinules are also used by other rails, including Water Rail, Moorhen,
Wood Rail Ar amides cajanea and Tasmanian Native Hen (pers. obs. on
captive individuals).

100 D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

Occasionally I have seen Gallinules sun-bathing while sitting on the
ground, with their legs projecting forwards under the body, all four toes
held apart and pointing forwards, and the wings closed.

Feeding Behaviour

The literature shows that Purple Gallinules are virtually omnivorous,
eating leaves, stems, seeds, grain, flowers, insects, molluscs, leeches, fish,
carrion, water snakes and a wide variety of other foods (Oliver 1955,
Mountfort 1958, Ali and Ripley 1969, Falla et al. 1966, Dement ’ev et al.
1969). Captive birds were seen to take vegetable matter by nibbling
low plants, pulling trailing branches down with the bill, clambering in
bushes, grubbing amongst soil and ground litter, and by lifting submerged
water weed in the bill. After food has been picked up in the bill it is
very often transferred to the feet and manipulated with them. Food is
held in the feet by apposition of the hind toe with the three closed fore-toes
(Fig. C), weed is combed with the fore-toes as it is held dangling from the
bill, and the feet are sometimes used to hold down large food objects
while they are pecked (e.g. fish and carrion meat).

Strijbos (1955) records a Gallinule eating the eggs in two egret nests
in an African heronry, and I watched this species stealing the eggs from
the nest of a pair of medium-sized captive babblers. The Gallinules
clambered through the outer branches of a thick laurel bush to reach this
nest, ignoring attacks and noisy threats from the parent babblers;
eventually one Gallinule forced its way through the branches to reach the
nest, and ate both of the two eggs which were in it.

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES IOI

Captive Gallinules persistently use the feet to hold food when they
are nibbling it, often “ wasting time ” transferring food from the bill
to the feet which could have been swallowed directly. Rowley (1968)
records the use of the feet when feeding on small figs picked from the
ground, but suggests that this is a special adaptation to fig eating.

However, use of the feet in feeding is probably of great importance to
Gallinules feeding in their natural reed-swamp habitats, both in enabling
them to feed from weed held above the surface of shallow water, and to
feed on stems and seed heads pulled down with the bill. The behaviour
has probably been retained in captivity only because it is an inherent
part of their feeding behaviour, not because it is useful in these highly
modified conditions. Young Gallinules attempt to hold food in their
feet from when they are about two or three weeks old, and do so success¬
fully when they are half to two-thirds grown.

These captive birds obtained flies and other small, winged insects by
picking them from the surface of shallow water, and earthworms and
snails by shovelling aside gravel with the closed bill, pushing stones aside
using the frontal shield. Food of many kinds was often carried in the
bill to water, and washed before it was swallowed.

Tail-Flicking

Purple Gallinules, like many other rails, have white under tail coverts
which contrast strikingly with the darker plumage surrounding them.
The patch formed in this way is used as a signal marking to warn other

Fig.|D. Tail-flicking of alarmed bird.

birds of the appearance of a potential predator, and it is emphasized by
tail-flicking movements (Fig. D). Tail-flicking and other behaviour also
functions in territorial (aggressive) display (as in the Moorhen, Howard
1940), and probably in providing a following signal for the young when
the birds are moving through thick cover. Tail-flicking seems to be

102 D. T. H0LY0AK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

performed as a response to anything which frightens the bird. It is
performed indiscriminately whether it happens to be preening, incubating,
bathing, sun-bathing, feeding or resting at the time. Tail-flicking was
also seen from birds which were apparently giving self-assertive display
to drive other birds away. The Moorhen spreads the (larger) white
patch on its under tail coverts in territorial threat, but does not flick its
tail. In this display of the Gallinule the tail-flicking seems likely to have
been derived from the alarm tail-flicking, as fear, excitement, or anger,
could produce this response in both situations.

Calls

As mentioned above, the captive Gallinules studied seemed to be
unusually quiet by comparison with the information given in standard
books, probably because of the lack of cover in this artificial environment.
Falla et al. (1966) list an ear-piercing screech — kwee-ow ; a draw out,
almost booming poo-koo-koo-koo call; a sighing kwee-uk ; an anxious
pee-ewk ; a bleating kwairk , and an agitated a-yik or k-yik call. The first
of these notes is given as the bird flicks its tail in the territorial calling
posture, and various ga-ga-ga or te-te-te-te calls are given in threat
behaviour (and apparently during sexual display, C. J. O. Harrison pers.
comm.). The vocabulary of this species seems to be highly variable,
and many of the different-sounding calls merge into each other, vary
considerably, or are ambivalent. Thus a detailed study will be needed
to work out their functions more precisely. This variability of the calls
may have an important function in promoting individual recognition in
this social species, where individuals are often out of each others’ sight
for long periods amongst vegetation.

From the evidence of sex-identity given by mating behaviour it is
apparent that the calls of female Purple Gallinules are softer and less
harsh than those of males. There is a similar sex difference in the voice of
other rails including the Moorhen (Howard 1940), Tasmanian Native
Hen (Ridpath 1964), Coot (Rlippell 1933, Grimeyer 1943) and American
Coot ( Fulica americana ; Gullion 1952).

Threat and Aggressive Behaviour

As with calls, some of the behaviour postures of Gallinules are ambi¬
valent, making it difficult to define their functions. However, unlike the
calls, most of the behavioural postures show little tendency to merge into
one another, so that they would appear to be worthy of record as a basis
for future work. I have been able to distinguish three different postures
used by Gallinules in agonistic encounters. The hunch-backed posture
shown in Fig. E is commonly used in all kinds of aggressive encounters,
especially when two birds meet while feeding. The posture is often only
slightly indicated, but nonetheless sufficient to be noticed by the other
bird and to cause it to respond. At higher intensities the neck is arched

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES IO3

Fig. E. Hunched threat posture.

Fig. F. Gaping threat posture.

Fig. G. Threat posture with tail flicking used in defence of territory.

and the head thrust towards the opponent. If the opponent does not
retreat then, it is usually pecked sharply on the neck or the back of the
head, often in short bursts as the victim retreats and its aggressor makes
short (two or three feet) runs after it. Several times I have seen an
attacked bird twist its head away as if to appease when it was attacked in
this way, but its aggressor pecked it regardless, causing the unfortunate
bird to run away. More often when this appeasing behaviour was shown
the threatened bird would be allopreened by the other, and sexual
behaviour frequently followed this.

Another slightly different posture is also used in threat, apparently most
often when the bird concerned is not feeding, but standing close to its
young, mate, or some bird which it considers itself temporarily paired to.
Here the threatening bird reaches forwards without arching the neck,
and makes a more or less prolonged gaping movement at its adversary
(Fig. F). The aggressor’s plumage is usually sleeked when this action is
used, and it is frequently aimed at birds of different species and frequently
followed or accompanied by bouts of chasing, again often in bursts of a

104 D. T. H0LY0AK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

few feet each time. I have watched captive birds persistently harrying a
Crowned Crane (Balearica pavonina) in this way, as well as ducks, and
smaller terrestrial birds.

A completely different agonistic posture appears to function mainly
in territory defence. The bird stands upright and flicks its tail to
emphasise the white under tail coverts, while giving loud kree or kree-ik
calls (Fig. G). From their subsequent behaviour it was apparent that
the birds giving this display were males on four occasions. When dis¬
playing in this way they will chase off any bird that closely approaches them
on the ground, and this kind of behaviour seemed to cause periodic division
of the Snowdon Aviary population into subgroups with scattered birds,
those birds with the brightest plumage and reddest bills (? males) tending
to be driven furthest.

A display corresponding to, and probably homologous with, the
“ swanning ” described for the American Coot by Gullion (1952) is
used in response to disturbances near the nest or chicks, or when another
bird intrudes into the nest area. In this display the bird fluffs its plumage
and raises the partly spread wings over the rump (Fig. H).

After aggressive behaviour, and sometimes interspersed with it, violent
pecking at food objects (? redirected aggression), and bill-wiping
(? an “ irrelevant activity ”) are frequently performed.

Courtship and Sexual Behaviour
Aggressive behaviour often merges into sexual behaviour. Slight
threat posturing and slight appeasement movements probably occur
whenever two Gallinules approach each other closely away from a nest,
and it is the subsequent behaviour of both birds which determines whether
or not sexual behaviour follows. If courtship behaviour is to follow
when two birds approach each other in this way, they usually either
allopreen (male preens female) or less often pass a small food item between
their bills.

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES IO5

Allopreening is of importance in the preliminary sexual displays, and
probably in maintaining a pair bond when it has formed. In the displays
preceding mating it is always (in my experience) the male bird which
preens the head and neck of the female. The female often appears to
solicit allopreening by turning her head away and fluffing the neck feathers,
and in these circumstances there can be little doubt that the allopreening
is a ritualised activity having little to do with plumage care. Harrison
(1965) discusses the functions of allopreening in birds, and shows that it
has considerable importance in sublimating aggression between birds
when they approach each other closely.

In contrast, allopreening at the nest in the Purple Gallinule is most
often mutual, and other parts of the plumage are usually preened in
addition to the head and neck (except in the “ nest changing ceremony ”,
see below). It was not at all infrequent to see two captive Gallinules
sitting head to tail on a clutch of eggs, each bird preening the back and
rump feathers of the other. Allopreening of this kind often alternated
with normal preening, and sometimes the oil gland of the other bird was
preened, and preen oil wiped on the feathers of both birds (four separate
series of observations, including more than three different birds). It was
apparent that allopreening of this kind had a significant and definite
function in the care of the plumage, as the movements used appeared
identical (from ranges down to three feet) to those used in normal
preening, and pieces of feather scale were frequently swallowed by the
preening bird.

The passing of small food objects between the bills of birds which
walked towards each other was seen on four different days, and each time
the actions used were very similar to those of a Gallinule feeding a chick.
I have seen this “ courtship-feeding ” in the pre-breeding period and
during incubation, and C. J. O. Harrison (pers. comm.) has seen it
performed by birds with well grown young. The infrequency of this
behaviour and the small size of the food items suggests that they are only
likely to be of ritual significance, and it is possible that the movements
might be derived from nest building rather than true courtship feeding,
as nest material is often passed from bird to bird at the nest site.

A typical behaviour pattern preceding copulation is that the two birds
approach each other giving slight threat display, then the female “ solicits ”
allopreening, and is preened on her head and neck by the male. At this
stage either or both birds may start “ walking time ”, a peculiar action
where the bird walks on the spot, raising its feet without closing the toes
as they usually do when the foot is lifted in walking (Fig. I). The allo¬
preening “ solicitation ” posture of the female may then be exaggerated
into the sexual solicitation posture (Fig. K), and the male may step or
jump on to her back and copulate. The male remains on the hunched
back of the female by clinging with its feet and balancing with flapping
wings (Fig. J), and mating usually lasts for two or three seconds, though

Io6 D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

Fig. I. “ Walking on the spot ” in sexual display.
Fig. J. Copulation.

Fig. K. Solicitation posture of female.

the male often remains on the female’s back for ten seconds or more,
and may attempt to mate several times while standing there. The posture
used by the female Gallinule when soliciting copulation is similar in many
ways to those of the Tasmanian Native Hen (pers. obs.), Moorhen
(Howard 1940), and American Coot (Gullion 1952).

While the female bird is being allopreened other Gallinules (presumed
to be males) may join in and preen on the opposite side, or from near to
the other preening bird. These other birds usually continue with their
preening while the first bird actually copulates, and I have not seen them
make mating attempts of their own. No call is given during copulation,
and the male steps off the female’s back and walks away from her, some¬
times it then preens, but not always; the female bird usually preens after a
mating attempt.

Breeding

Purple Gallinules build bulky nests of vegetation in the wild, resembling
large nests of the Coot. The nests are generally built in thick cover, and

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES IO7

usually just above shallow water, or up to a few feet above the water
surface (Mountfort 1958, Falla et al. 1966, Ali and Ripley 1969). Both
male and female birds share in bringing material to the nest site, but
much of the material seems to be incorporated into the nest by a female
bird, who receives it from the bill of a male, and perhaps other females.

The captive Gallinules at the London Zoo built nests of grass under or
near such ground vegetation as was available to them, and nest building
activities continue right through the incubation period. Harrison (1970)
has commented on the social nesting of these Gallinules and mentions a
group of four birds which co-operated in the raising of a single brood.
The birds of this group all carried nest material to the sites which were
used for successive breeding attempts, but only one (possibly sometimes
two) of the birds actually incorporated material into the growing nest
structure; the others collected material, then passed it to the bird which
was on or near the nest. During incubation the bird which was sitting
spent considerable amounts of time plucking material from within bill
reach of the nest and incorporating this into the nest walls; it seems
likely that other birds incorporated material into the nest structure in this
way, besides the usual one.

In addition to the group of four birds mentioned by Harrison (1970)
there was also another group of three in the aviary which acted as a social
unit for several months during a nesting attempt, but which was less
cohesive than the other group. At least three birds from the group of
four, and two birds from the group of three helped with incubation, but
I have the impression that the male bird which I most commonly saw
mating did little if any sitting (observations on individually marked birds
are needed to confirm this). All members of both groups took part in
both feeding and brooding their respective groups of young (so far as I
could tell), although the shares of different individuals differed con¬
siderably. From the rate at which eggs appeared in three different nests
(one each day for total of six days) it would seem almost certain that each
“ clutch ” was the product of a single female, as other rails lay one egg
per day (Gullion 1954). Incubation periods of approximately 23 and
24 days (plus or minus one day with each clutch) were recorded for
clutches of five and seven eggs from these birds. With each clutch all
eggs which were going to hatch probably hatched within about a day of
the first egg, despite the fact that incubation of both clutches probably
started before laying was completed.

Two or sometimes three Gallinules from these groups would sometimes
incubate simultaneously, although most often only a single bird would be
in contact with the eggs at any one time. Changeovers at the nest often
involved little or no ceremony, and they were usually gradual — often one
bird would join the other on the nest, then after a while the first would
walk away. Most often a bird approaching the nest would bring a piece
of grass or other nest material and pass it to the sitting bird, then allopreen

108 D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES

the sitting bird in a very rough and stereotyped-looking way, before
sitting down beside it and trying to move on to the eggs.

With several birds on the nest at once it was not surprising that eggs
were sometimes pushed beyond the confines of the nest rim. When this
happened the eggs were pulled back by deft-looking egg recovery move¬
ments. The bill would be hooked over the egg, often slightly shivered,
and the egg would be drawn back towards the sitting bird (Fig. L). At
one nest a single egg rolled down a slope away from the nest and was not
recovered, and the same must frequently happen in nests built in reed
beds.

Fig. L. Egg recovery movement.

These captive Gallinules did not build substantial nest-like structures
in addition to the nest which they used, but separate platforms are built
in reed swamp habitats (Ali and Ripley 1969, Mountfort 1958). These
platforms are used for feeding (Mountfort), and probably for roosting
(as in the Moorhen, Howard 1940). Desultory platform-building
attempts such as the one noted by Harrison (1970) carried out by these
captive Gallinules probably represent expressions of the platform building
behaviour which may be an important part of their activities in reed
swamps. The captive birds were walking on firm terrain for much of
the time, so that there was probably no need to build platforms.

For the first day or so after hatching the young Gallinule chick remains
in the nest and receives little if any food, although it is brooded almost
continually. After this the chicks wander away from the nest and are
brooded and fed by other birds of their particular group. At first the
food was almost invariably pieces of grass bitten off and passed to them in
the bills of the old birds. Sometimes adults were seen to pass food from
bill to bill among themselves (see above) before feeding the young, and
often food would be successively given to and taken from the young.
When the chicks grew larger they were often fed on the food which was
provided in food trays for the adults, including pieces of meat and fruit.
Harrison (1970) suggests that the passing to and fro of food between adult
and chick may serve to break it up for the benefit of the chick. When
young birds are accidentally separated from the adults which are tending

D. T. HOLYOAK — BEHAVIOUR OF CAPTIVE PURPLE GALLINULES I09

them they give a loud, high-pitched peep-peep-peep call which is inces¬
santly repeated until they are given attention. Chicks two weeks old
were beginning to take food for themselves, but young half the size of an
adult were still being fed at times, a month or so later.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to P. J. S. Olney for affording me facilities aiding the study
of birds at the London Zoo, to Miss D. M. Sager for help in making
observations, and to C. J. O. Harrison for information quoted and helpful
comments on my manuscript.

REFERENCES

Ali, S., and Ripley, D. 1969. Handbook of the Birds of India and Pakistan.
Bombay, London and New York.

Dement’ev, G. P., Gladkov, N. A., and Spangenberg, E. P. 1969. Birds of
the Soviet Union. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.
Falla, R. A., et al. 1966. A Field Guide to the Birds of New Zealand. London.
Grimeyer, D. 1943. Geslachtelijk geluidsverschil en enkele voorlopige
mededelingen aangaande het gedrag van der Meerkoet. Ardea 32, 273-278.
Gullion, G. W. 1952. The displays and calls of the American Coot. Wilson
Bull., 64, 83-97.

Gullion, G. W. 1954. The reproductive cycle of American Coots in California.
Auk, 71, 366-412.

Harrison, C. J. O. 1965. Allopreening as agonistic behaviour. Behaviour,
24, 161-209.

Harrison, C. J. O. 1970. Helpers at the nest in the Purple Gallinule ( Porphyrio
porphyrio). Avicult. Mag., 76, 2-4.

Howard, E. 1940. A Waterhen’s World. Cambridge, England.
Mackworth-Praed, C. W., and Grant, C. H. B. 1957. African Handbook of
Birds, Birds of Eastern and North-Eastern Africa. London, New York
and Toronto, vol. 1, 2nd edn.

Mountfort, G. 1958. Portrait of a wilderness. London.

Oliver, W. R. B. 1955. New Zealand Birds. Wellington, N.Z., 2nd edn.
Ridpath, M. G. 1964. The Tasmanian Native Hen. Austral. Nat. Hist.,
14, 346-350.

Rowley, I. 1968. Unusual feeding technique of Bald Coot. Emu, 67, 295-296,
Ruppell, W. 1933. Physiologie und Akustik der Vogelstimme. J. f. Orn., 81.
433-543.

Strijbos, J. P. 1955. The plundering Gallinule. Bokmakierie, 7, 9-10.

no

T. S. THOMSON — INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES

INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES

By T. S. Thomson (Hoole, Cheshire, England)

Growing vegetation is a desirable addition to any compound housing
livestock. In addition to greatly enhancing the surroundings, natural
nesting sites contribute to breeding success. Many plants and suitable
shrubs are recommended in articles on the subject. However, with
aviaries being frequently overpopulated, young plants frequently fail to
become established. Very few bird keepers could tolerate aviaries kept
empty while plants were allowed to make the necessary growth.

It was by chance that the use of Lombardy Poplar trees proved to be
very satisfactory in furnishing planted aviaries. When aviaries were
constructed after the end of the war, poplar trees provided posts to help
overcome the shortage of timber. Four large poplars provided 7 ft.
posts up to 5 in. in diameter. The branches were trimmed from the
posts of poplar, but two or three were left on near the top to act as perches.
The posts were inserted about 18 in. in the soil and supported the wooden
battens on which the roof netting was fixed. A lengthy nail driven
through the batten and into the post top held it in position. It was a
pleasant surprise to find that the poplar posts burst into buds and leaf.
Not only did the poplars act as uprights supporting the roof; they
developed into a dense mass of growth. This required clipping back at
least twice a season, depending on how near the roof netting the plants
were pruned back to. It is most desirable to prevent any shoots from
growing through the netting. After a few seasons with the plants well
established, the task of clipping back the growth near the roof was greatly
alleviated by ring-barking the poplars about 9 in. from the top. Ring¬
barking is the removal of a J in. strip of bark round the circumference
of the plant trunk down to the cambium layer. This results in the dying
off of all the plant above the ring, the sap being cut off. In later years
when new stumps of poplar were prepared for planting it was found much
easier to remove all the bark from the top 9 in. thus preventing any
growth. In addition most of the branches were left on, a bush being
formed in the first season. The leaves are smaller in the first year being
normal in size in the second season.

Even in aviaries housing bud-eating Bullfinches, 10 to 12 recently
planted stumps of poplar became established. Where only one or two
were planted they frequently failed to develop, the buds being constantly
pecked by the birds. Roof spans up to 30 ft. were supported entirely by
poplar cuttings. After a period of four to five years a few became
ineffective as roof supports, the top 9 in. having deteriorated as a result
of the barking action. Generally the greater the top circumference of a
cutting the longer it acts as a roof support. Anything under 2 in. in
circumference was not to be relied upon but 4 in. upwards frequently

T. S. THOMSON — INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES

III

lasted over 15 years. It is, of course, quite a simple matter to replace
or supplement any plants which deteriorate.

Visitors have inquired about the cut off poplar posts pushing upwards
as they grow. While there is an increase in the circumference, no
upward growth of the trunk takes place. The top 9 in. of barked area
does not develop in any way. Little harm, if any, is done by a few young
shoots growing up through the roof netting. Usually the state of the
nests in the shrubs dictates when they may be clipped back. On some
occasions clipping takes place when birds are sitting without upsetting
the breeding cycle. Where Bullfinches are kept the spring growth of
foliage is retarded by up to a month, while the effect from Greenfinches
is about a fortnight, the birds eating the earlier buds. The Poplar is so
strong in growth that the buds taken by the birds are soon replaced. The
only disadvantage of the retarding of the initial coming into leaf is the
lateness of the provision of natural nesting sites, for the plants do not suffer
any permanent damage. To offset this a few prefabricated nesting sites
are provided in the shelter part of the aviaries, it being considered it is in
the bird’s interest to have the early nests under cover. A few evergreen
cuttings, usually laurel because of its availability, are wired into the

1 12

T. S. THOMSON — INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES

leafless Poplar plants to provide cover for early nests. While laurel leaves
hang for over a year in the dead state and provide cover, care must be taken
to prevent leaves falling across a nest. I have records of losses resulting
from a laurel leaf falling on eggs.

Poplar post cuttings inserted 3 ft. apart form a hedge. In one aviary
a pair of Waterhens nested on the top and kept the growth partly under
control by their continuous pecking of the leaves. The same effect
was experienced when the same species nested on top of a privet hedge,
the leaves being removed on top of the hedge several feet from the nest,
resulting in it being unnecessary to clip the hedge all season. Privet
leaves are also taken by members of the pheasant family without any
apparent ill effect. However, any species which chew bark should not
be enclosed in aviaries with privet.

Poplars can be trimmed to provide nesting sites from near ground
level. Sometimes long grasses flourish at the base and being protected
they grow into the poplar foliage thus providing ideal nesting sites for low
nesters such as Yellowhammers.

When the Poplar cuttings have become established the trimming back
results in a dense mass of foliage. When nesting is in progress it is some¬
times necessary to view through the growth with the sun on the other side,
in order to detect nests. While a twice a season clipping, plus an early
Spring pruning, keeps the Poplars in good shape, it may be desirable to
resort to more drastic action every 10 years or so. Branches with brush¬
like tops can be cut back. The oldest Poplars are over 20 years and
present no trouble to keep them within bounds. Probably restricting the
growth of the foliage effects the root action on the same principle as the
Japanese dwarf culture of trees.

While a Poplar tree may only provide a few trunk-size cuttings suitable
for the dual purpose of roof supports and aviary shrubs, all Poplars offer
cuttings for striking. However, it takes several years for one to two-inch
diameter cuttings to develop heads suitable for natural nesting sites.

The smallest flights here with growing Poplars are only 9 ft. x 3 ft.
Several flights 12 ft. x 6 ft. have a single plant at one end. Probably
many would not advocate any use of live plants in such small units. It is
a question of the stocking density. Here only one pair of finches occupy
such aviaries. In large units the Poplars planted 3 ft. apart in rows 9 ft.
distant, form continuous hedges with lanes between. It is always
desirable to provide the maximum flying space in aviaries and considera¬
tion should be given to the siting of the plants. While a long narrow
aviary gives the inmates a fly-way back and forth the birds must stop
at each end. An aviary which provides unlimited continuous flight would
be of a circular shape, not very practical to construct. Here units
20 ft. x 20 ft. provide finches with continuous flight and units 40 ft. x 40 ft.
serve large parrakeets. Such desirable conditions are most frequently
used by the birds in the early Spring.

T. S. THOMSON — INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES II3

It is quite a simple matter to provide live perches from the poplars by
leaving individual branches unpruned. Not only is there no fixing
problem, there is no need to be constantly replacing perches of the con¬
ventional type, a task the average bird keeper frequently fails to carry out
properly. In addition fixing perches in aviaries results in the deterioration
of the structure. How often does one observe perches supported by the
ends pushed through the wire netting? The constant action of the birds
alighting wears off the galvanized coating, rust sets in and the wire
fractures.

Where pheasants and other heavy types are kept, perches trained from
poplars are most successful. Being free to yield they do not give sufficient
support and the large birds are discouraged from using them. Branches
cut for perches tend to become damp in wet weather and bone dry in dry
weather, neither condition being normally desirable.

As stated earlier, most aviaries are generally over-stocked and a planted
unit can act as a test. If plants fail to flourish the answer could be too
many birds. In one large unit here there is an annual “ battle ” between
the gardener and the bird keeper. The aviary in question contains
matured standard fruit trees, mostly apples. It is used as a breeding unit,
being rested during the winter. If the birds, mostly finches, are admitted
before the blossom bursts there is a loss of a ton of fruit. On the other
hand, keeping the birds out of this orchard aviary greatly affects the
season’s breeding results. While the actual time of commencing nesting
is not really involved, the birds being accommodated in an adjacent
100 ft. x 30 ft. planted unit, the best results are obtained when the first
round of young are fed on the fruit buds. The crops of the young finches
are as green and fat as ripe peas in a pod. Fruit trees have two types of
bud, fruit and growth. The fruit buds are plump and develop earlier.
The fruit trees require an annual pruning mainly to prevent shoots from
growing up through the roof netting, 14 ft. high. Poplar cuttings of the
conventional type were inserted 18 in. apart to form a barrier hedge against
visitors wandering through this orchard aviary, keeping them to the walk-
around pathway.

Planted aviaries here are much dryer than unplanted ones, probably
due to root action keeping the soil open. On the other hand planted
aviaries encourage vermin. I will comment on this in a later article
While plants encourage insect life, it is considered a minimal fringe
benefit in average-sized aviaries. Even in large units, rested in Winter,
very little natural insect life is available. In one enclosure a full range of
vegetables is grown, plus soft fruit. It has been found necessary to
introduce blackfly on broad beans, the plants so treated being covered
until the aphis had gained a hold. Three 60 ft. rows of broad and 120 ft.
of runner beans are grown annually, and when infected by black and
green fly give automatic success in breeding species such as Siskins.

1 14 T. S. THOMSON — INSTANT PLANTED AVIARIES

In some seasons over ioo birds have been kept in this vegetable garden
aviary, the results and effects providing interesting data.

Non-gardening aviculturists may be deterred from attempting to root
post-sized poplars. The gardening experts advice on rooting poplar
cuttings is somewhat contrary to the procedure which has been repeatedly
proved successful here. The cuttings whether large stumps or small
shoots are inserted in early Spring, not in October or November, although
this latter period is recommended by the experts. The Lombardy
Poplar used here is known as Populus nigra italica , there being 35 different
species of Poplar listed in the Royal Horticultural Society’s Dictionary of
Gardening.

THE WINGED WORLD IN 1969

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

Despite the usual frustrations and near-successes last year proved to be a
fairly successful one at the Winged World, as we succeeded in breeding
Southern Tree Pies, Brown-throated Barbets, Yellow-breasted Fruit
Doves, Green Wood-hoopoes, Red-billed Hornbills, Fairy Bluebirds and
Roulrouls. Many others got to the egg or fledgling stage only to be
thwarted, usually by the attentions or close proximity of other birds.
A pair of Little Bee-eaters tunnelled and were later seen taking live food in,
but their tunnel collapsed and was then deserted. Spotted Morning
Warblers made mud nests in several places, couldn’t decide which to use
and laid their pale blue eggs all over the place. Hoopoes, Mrs. Wilson’s
Tanagers, Andaman Grackles, Abyssinian Ground-Thrushes and
Bleeding-heart Pigeons all got so very near to success also.

Many interesting acquisitions were made during the year. A group
of five Carmine Bee-eaters imported early in June from West Africa are
still thriving at the time of writing, and have been housed in the large
landscaped compartment specially arranged for tunnellers, in which the
Little Bee-eaters made their effort.

Groups of Ferruginous Wood Partridges, Van Den Bock’s Pittas,
Spur-winged Jacanas, African Jacanas, Spur-winged Plovers and White¬
faced Tree Duck were received, and pairs of Black-throated Wattle-Eyes,
Steller’s Jays, Toucan Barbets and Scimitar-bills have been added to the
collection. Other interesting newcomers are Van Hasselt’s Sunbirds,
Ross’s Touraco, and Grey-hooded Kingfisher.

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS 115

ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH

(Leucopsar rothschildi)

REGISTER AND REPORT ON 1969 CENSUS
By D. T. Spilsbury (Malvern Links, Worcestershire, England)

Because Rothschild’s Mynah has a limited distribution, being confined
to certain habitat near the northern coast of the Indonesian island of Bali,
the council of the Avicultural Society decided that an annual census and
breeders report should be published in the Avicultural Magazine in
the hope that this would stimulate interest in a captive conservation
programme for the species.

It should be noted that an annual census both for young bred and
numbers held, was, and is conducted by the International Zoo Yearbook
but this is in respect of L. rothschildi held in zoos throughout the world
and does not include the numbers held or bred by private aviculturists.

In 1968 the first census was conducted amongst our members, both
private aviculturists and representatives of zoos, by the late Mr. W. R.
Partridge, and the resulting information together with data assembled by
the International Zoo Yearbook was published in the Avicultural
Magazine, 75, 3, which was for May-June, 1969. It is to be regretted
that Reg Partridge was not able to continue for many years the task he
had set himself and for which his knowledge of this species made him
eminently suitable.

The 1968 census revealed a total captive population for L. rothschildi
of 1 71 specimens held in 55 separate collections.

In 1969 it was decided to write to all known owners informing them
about the Avicultural Society’s census and asking them to complete and
return a census form which in addition to the essential numerical data
sought information about the species in captivity and which when con¬
cluded may suggest the best means of persuading L. rothschildi to
reproduce sufficiently to represent a self perpetuating captive population.
This year owners were requested to send information about the age and
origin of their birds, causes of death for both adult and young stock,
longevity, dispersal of surplus stock and also if willing to co-operate in a
ringing scheme. Breeders of L. rothschildi were also asked to answer
questions concerning the housing of breeding pairs, the type of nest box
and nesting material, the number of young reared in 1969 and the prior
years, the success of each pair in terms of nests, eggs per nest and young
hatched per nest, and were the young removed when independent.
Within the register will be found the full details of this survey but perhaps
a summary and some further thoughts and conclusions will be more
acceptable to some readers.

There can be little doubt that L. rothschildi is an excellent choice for
the aviculturist to attempt a captive breeding programme with for it is

Il6 D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

apparent that adult wild caught stock and more important aviary-bred
specimens, once independent, can and do live for a reasonably long time
which, of course, does mean that breeding pairs can produce young for
several years. The longevity record for the species possibly rests with
the birds which Mr. Ezra obtained before the last war and which con¬
tinued to live for four or five years after his death in 1956. The
Zoological Society of London had a specimen for 12 years, and there are
numerous examples within the register for both wild caught and captive-
bred stock of specimens still living with seven, eight and nine years to
their credit.

It is interesting to find that of the 178 specimens held in captivity
71 are captive-bred, 64 wild caught and the remainder are of uncertain
origin. Of the breeding pairs only one pair that was bred in captivity
have so far reproduced and reared their young to independence, and
two other owners having pairs, of which the female is captive-bred,
have produced young. Within the birds of uncertain origin is the
Indonesian total of 21 specimens at Jogjakarta.

It would be impertinent of me, having no specialized veterinary
knowledge, to draw any firm conclusions from the causes of death for
both adult and immature Rothschild’s Mynahs but one or two points I
must make. It is clear that not sufficient owners do bother to have their
dead birds examined by skilled avian pathologists, which is a great pity,
particularly in the case of young for here we have the greatest mortality.
The incidence of avian endoparasites is not surprising and deaths directly
attributed to Ascaridia are noted in the register. It would perhaps be wise
for owners to examine faecal samples regularly and take the necessary
steps should ascarids be present. I imagine that in aviaries having a
natural earth floor and particularly on new sites, the gapeworm could be a
problem but so far no repoits indicate that these parasites have caused
death.

There are several instances of mortality due to fighting both amongst
the species itself and from other birds. Incompatability between a pair
either seasonably or permanently must be watched for and if L. rothschildi
is to be kept within a community no risk should be taken with this rare
species by having more aggressive birds as companions.

The production of young that leave the nest or die within it having leg
and other deformities is well known in both this and other insect rearing
species and they are probably due to a calcium deficiency or to a functional
disorder which prevents the absorption of calcium. The large number
of captive-bred specimens that fail to breed and the number of infertile
eggs might also be attributed to the incorrect balance between calcium
and other essentials of the diet. Readers wishing to gain fuller apprecia¬
tion of the problem would do well to consult the papers, “ Cramps and fits
in carnivorous birds ” by J. D. Wallach and G. M. Flieg within Vol. 10,
International Zoo Yearbook.

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS 117

All owners were asked if they would be willing to co-operate in a ringing
scheme which would make the permanent identification of all captive
held stock possible. Such a system would be essential if a stud book for
the species is started as indeed it is for any livestock that is to be per¬
petuated along prescribed lines over an extended period. In Great
Britain, of the 34 specimens of L. rothschildi at least 12 were bred by
Mrs. Scamell, mostly by one pair, and it would probably not be sensible
to lose the opportunity of identifying these birds permanently before
the knowledge of their origin is lost and unwitting inbreeding to a
dangerous degree occurs. It was proposed that birds should be rung
with split rings and young should be rung when independent of their
parents.

Of the 50 owners who returned their census forms, 32 were in favour
of ringing (Zurich, New York, Philadelphia and San Diego operate their
own schemes), Harewood and Mrs. Scamell would ring young but not
their breeding pairs, two owners would not ring and 14 owners did not
complete the question.

In order to make the census as complete as the available information
allows the following owners either have or recently had L. rothschildi
in their collections and whilst most of them have been contacted none
has made a return. I would be grateful if anyone can give details about
these.

Brown, Alfred W., Ormmond Plantation, Destrehan, Louisiana. It is
believed that Mr. Brown maintains the collection of birds that belonged
to his late wife and a breeding pair of L. rothschildi and their young could
still be there. Lenz, W. Lee, 1401 Guadalajara PL, Claremont, California
9171 1. Mr. Lee Lenz has bred this species with success and at least
two zoos have his young. Ontario Zoological Park, Upper Canada
Zoological Society, Zoo Park Road and River Road, Wasaga Beach,
Ontaria, Canada. One male (Vol. 10). Tiergarten Heidelberg, Gemeinn.
GmbH, 69 Heidelberg 1, Tiergartenstr 8, Germany. (Vol. 10, one male,
one female, both captive-bred. Tiergarten Schonbrunn, 1 13 1 Wien XIII,
Austria. The Zurich Zoo sold two birds, presumed immature, to this
zoo in September, 1969. (A.S.C.)

The dispersal of specimens occurred mostly as the result of selling
young but it is good to find that owners having odd birds are attempting
to place them with owners having odd specimens of the opposite sex on
breeding terms, which, of course, is the only intelligent thing to do.

During 1969 Mrs. Scamell, Basle, Zurich, Milwaukee, have been able to
hatch and rear to independence young Rothschild’s Mynahs and seven
other owners report egg laying by their pairs. Of these successes Zurich
is surely the highlight for the second generation Rothschild’s Mynah this
zoo has produced in captivity. I am sure that all owners of this species
will wish me to convey to Mr. C. R. Schmidt and the staff responsible our
congratulations on this fine achievement.

Il8 D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

Breeding seems to have been achieved under two separate housing
systems, in small flights solely occupied by the breeding pair and in very
large community aviaries where a breeding pair has been able to establish
sufficient breeding territory and monopolize enough of the available live
food to rear young. There seems to be a trend particularly in the U.S.A.
towards the single pair to each aviary method, and I agree that greater
control of the nesting and rearing requirements can be achieved this way.
However, the breeding of insectivorous birds from pairs housed in this
way, with no need to defend the nest and an unlimited supply of food
easily gathered, might account to some extent to the eviction of young
that is so prevalent. Whichever way of breeding is selected it does seem
that the species resents interference when rearing — or at least needs to
feel secure within the nesting area, and I would assume that a planted
flight, perhaps with climbing plants masking the nest, would help to
create the best environment.

It would seem that the species is reasonably catholic in its choice of
nesting site and will utilize twigs, grasses, leaves and many other materials
to line the nest cavity.

The clutch of eggs can number from two to five but three and four seems
to be quite normal. Instances of nesting and egg-laying cycles occurring
six times in a year have been noted, but it is doubtful if more than three
separate successful broods of young could be regulaily attained each year
without resorting to fostering out eggs.

It is difficult to ascertain the percentage of hatching in fertile eggs but
one breeder in 1969 found 90% did hatch and I should expect the average
to be better than 50%.

I think on balance it is best to remove the young when independent,
certainly from small breeding units it is essential and probably even in
the large community flights breeding results would have been better had
not young been present.

This year, as occurred in 1968, enthusiastic breeders and owners
suggested that the Avicultural Society should establish an official stud
book for L. rothschildi. Official in that the studbook would be endorsed
by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources, and the International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens
through the IUCN’s Liaison Committee. It has always been my hope
that this will be possible but I do not think that the time has yet come to
embark on an official studbook for two reasons. There are still owners of
L. rothschildi , particularly in Indonesia, who are not yet prepared to
co-operate with us and it is essential that all owners do so, and it is by no
means clear that the species is capable of becoming self-perpetuating
under captive conditions. I must remind you that only four of the 50
owners that returned census forms managed to rear young. The council
of the Avicultural Society will no doubt apply to the Secretary of the Zoo
Liaison Committee to propose the establishment of an official studbook

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS 119

when these two conditions indicate that the studbook could be main¬
tained. Meanwhile the Avicultural Society will continue to conduct its
own census and breeders report. In 1970 we shall attempt to establish
the diet for the successful rearing of young and general feeding for the
species, try to determine the best way of sexing Rothschild’s Mynah and
continue to seek information concerning mortality for the species.

I would like to express my gratitude to all who completed and returned
their census forms ; in this day of bureaucratic spying through form filling,
it must come as a severe blow to find the practice has extended to one’s
pastime !

In extending the publicity for the census I wrote a number of articles
and would like to thank the Editor of Cage and Aviary Birds , Mr. W. S.
Page; the Editor of Die Gefiederte Welt , Dr. j. Steinbacher; the Editor of
Foreign Birds , Mr. H. B. Wragg; the Editory of Oryx , Mrs. M. Fitter;
and Dr. and Mrs. L. A. Swaenepoel who edit Le Mond des Oiseaux and
De Vogelwereld, for kindly publishing them.

Mr. Joseph Lucas has again kindly given permission for material
published within the International Zoo Yearbook to be used for this year’s
census.

CENSUS

{Abbreviations. “ A.S.C. ” stands for Avicultural Society Census 1969. “ Vol. 8,”
“ Vol. 9 ” and “ Vol. 10 ” refer to Extracts from International Zoo Yearbooks .)

Country Name Address and Notes $ Sex

Male Female Unknown

Belgium

Societe Royale de Zoologie, Antwerpen 1, 26, Koningin
Astridplein. (A.S.C.) 2

These birds were purchased from Copenhagen Zoo in
December 1965 where they were bred and hand-reared.

Ceylon

The Zoological Gardens of Ceylon, Anagarika Dhar-
mapla Mawatha, Dehiwala. (A.S.C.) 1

This pair is wild caught and purchased from a Thailand
dealer in December 1959 and September 1967.

Denmark

Zoologisk Have, Kobenhavn F., Den. Roskildevej 32.
(A.S.C.) 1

This breeding pair is wild caught, the male obtained
1959 and the female in 1961. Dr. Holger Poulsen,
Curator of Birds, reports that in 1969 this pair nested
twice but without success. In 1963 one youngster was
reared, in 1964 nine young in two broods were raised to
independence. All young so far have been hand reared
from an age of one week. Breeding Flight 3x2x3m.
inside, 4x2x3m. outside. Some years this aviary was
planted some not, also the pair shared this aviary with
other species some years. The nest box was wooden,

40 x20 x20 cm., and materials were fine hay, feathers
and small twigs.

1

1

continued

120 D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

Country Name Address and Notes $

Male

Denmark — continued

H. Christiansen, 4953 Vistuborg. (A.S.C.) 1

This breeding pair are father and daughter. The
original pair was purchased before 1965 and was wild
caught. Young were hatched in 1965, 1966 and 1967,
but were killed by the adult male between 6-13 days.

In 1968 the male was removed from the flight after eggs
were laid and kept out of sight and hearing of the female.

The female reared one youngster to independence (two
hatched but one died at ten days) and this was removed.

The male was returned and the pair bred again but
though young were hatched the female would not feed
them. In the spring of 1969 the male killed the female
and the young hen was placed in an adjoining flight.

Later the young female was allowed to join the adult
male. Two eggs were laid that contained young. The
breeding flight was planted and had dimensions of 2 m.
long, 1*20 m. wide and 2 m. high, the shelter was the
same size. The nest box was 30 cm. wide, 18 cm. high,
at the back, 15 cm. at the front and 15 cm. in depth.

The diameter of the entrance placed at the end of the
front was 10 cm.

E. Norgaard-Olesen, 6851 Janderup Vestjylland. (A.S.C.) 1

This pair was purchased in 1964 and was wild caught.

These birds are housed in an unplanted flight with earth
floor during the summer but are wintered in a cage
3 m. long, 1*5 m. wide and 2 m. high. The pair occupy
their flight solely.

France

Parc Zoologique de Cleres, Rouen, S.M. (A.S.C.) 1

The origin of this bird is unknown and another of the
same sex has recently been sent to the Washington Zoo.
Menagerie-Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle 57,
rue Cuvier, Paris seme. (A.S.C.)

This bird was wild caught. A recorded death for the
species at Paris was from Hepatitis (a female).

Germany

Tierpark Berlin (East), D.D.R.-1136 Berlin, Am Tier-
park 41. (A.S.C.) 2

One male obtained from Copenhagen Zoo in 1964 where
it was bred and hand-reared the same year. The second
male was wild caught and arrived in June 1967.

Aktien-Verein des Zoologischen Gartens zu Berlin,

1 Berlin 30, Hardenbergplatz 8. (A.S.C.)

This bird, thought to be male, was purchased from
Basle Zoo where it was bred in 1969.

AG. Zoologischer Garten Koln, 5 Koln 60, Riehler Str.,

173. (A.S.C.) 1

This pair, which is wild caught, was obtained in June,

1964, and nested twice in 1969; each time two eggs were
laid but no young was hatched. This pair is housed
with six other birds ( Lamprotornus superbus, L. chalybus,

Icterus icterus, Notiospar auraeus ) in a flight (within a
Birdhouse) 2-80 x 2*70 x 3-00 (h) m. Central heating
with a range 20-2S°C. is present for this flight which
has a sand floor but is unplanted. The nest box is
described as a wooden starling box 23 x 23 X 23 cm. In
1967 one youngster was reared and it, together with its
female parent, was sent to Pretoria Zoo.

? Sex

Female Unknown

I

I

I

I

I

continued

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

121

Country Name Address and Notes
Germany— continued

Duisburger Tierpark A.G., 41 Duisburg, Mulheimer
Str. 273. (A.S.C.)

One pair came from Zurich Zoo in 1961 and Dr. D. Poley
believes that they were bred there. The male, of
unknown origin, arrived in i960. The birds are now
housed in a flight (planted) 8x3m. but no breeding
behaviour has ever been noted.

Zoologischer Garten, 6 Frankfurt a.M. 1 ,A lfred Brehm-
Platz 16. (A.S.C.)

One bird purchased from a dealer in October, 1963,
probably wild caught, the other, bred at Zurich Zoo,
was obtained in July, 1966. The cause of death of four
adult birds in the years 1962 and 1963, and another in
1965, all shortly after arrival was from ascaridae and
stomach parasites. In 1965 one adult died from acute
catarrhal enteritis, and in 1967 an adult died from
tuberculosis of the liver.

Krefelder Tierpark, Krefeld, Uerdingerstr. 377. (A.S.C.)
Two of these birds were bred at Basle Zoo and were
obtained in 1965, and the other was wild caught and
purchased in June, 1964.

Wilhelma Zoologisch-Botanischer Garten 7000 Stuttgart,
Postfach 1227. (A.S.C.)

One bird, probably wild caught, obtained March, 1965,
the other obtained from Basle Zoo in September, 1968.
Cause of adult death Enteritis (Anthrakose ?).

d $ Sex

Male Female Unknown

2 I

I

X

3

2

Great Britain

Birdland Zoo Gardens, Bourton-on-the-Water. (A.S.C.) 1

This pair is captive bred, the male by Mr. W. R.
Partridge, the female by Mrs. K. M. Scamell, and both
it is thought in 1966. For the last two years there has
been nest inspection only.

Castle, D. F., Southampton. (A.S.C.)

These birds were purchased from Mr. Partridge in
February, 1969, as a possible pair. One bird, the pre¬
sumed male, is wild caught, the other bird was bred by
Captain de Quincey in 1965 and has a leg deformity.

The Zoological Society of London has kindly allowed
their female to join these birds in the hope that another
breeding pair can be established.

Dudley Zoological Society, Worcs. (A.S.C.)

These were purchased in April 1964, and are wild caught.
Greater London Council, Parks Department. (A.S.C.) 1

This bird was bred by Capt. de Quincey, possibly in 1965.

Hale, I. G., Glamorgan. (A.S.C.) 1

This pair was bred by Mrs. Scamell and purchased
in September 1968. They solely occupy an aviary
12x10 ft., including a planted flight with earth floor.

A nest box 16x9x9m. with interior base covered by
peat and decayed wood. No nesting activity as yet.
Harewood Bird Garden, Yorks. (A.S.C.) 2

These two pairs were formerly in Mr. Partridge’s
collection and both have hatched young. Pair 1 reared
one youngster in 1966 (in 1965 the male of this pair with
another female reared two young). Pair 2 hatched
young in 1968, as did pair 1, but these were not reared.

Both pairs are wild caught (date of purchase unknown)

1

2

2

1

2

continued

i22 d. t. spilsbury— Rothschild’s mynah, report on census

Country Name Address and Notes $ Sex

Great Britain— continued Male Female Unknown

and each pair was housed separately in planted flights
20 x 8 ft. plus shelter io x 8 ft. Nest boxes 15 x 12 x 7!
in. with a square entrance hole z\ x 2^in. and an outside
landing ledge. Nesting material mostly fine twigs and
roots with some grass and feathers. Fresh green
leaves were also found in the nesting cavity. The cause
of death for young is the usual rejection by the parents.

Within 24 hours of hatching the young would be
thrown out the nest. From previous years it has
been found this procedure would continue until late
summer and the last nest of eggs would be hatched and
the young more usually reared. Mr. Hall suggests that
the success comes after the peak in breeding condition is
over. Pair 1 nested three times and pair 2 three times,
the clutch for each pair being usually four eggs but
sometimes three or five. In 1969, whilst the two pairs
were still with Mr. Partridge, an interesting experiment
in the use of foster parents was tried. Three pairs of
common Starlings, Sturnus vulgaris, were housed in a
large flight and allowed to nest at the same time as the
Rothschild’s mynahs. Eggs were transferred from the
mynahs to the starlings but rejection of the hatched
young, of both species, took place from the starlings
nests. A second attempt was made and eggs were again
transferred. Just before hatching a panel in the aviary
roof wire netting was removed to allow the starlings to
forage for their own food but two pairs and one male
promptly decamped. The remaining female hatched
two young mynahs and reared them on her own but
never leaving the aviary to do so. One youngster died
just before it left the nest and the other died about a
week after leaving the nest, dietary deficiencies probably
accounting for these losses. In 1969 approximately 90%
of the eggs hatched.

I am grateful to Mrs. A. B. Partridge and to Mr. A. E.

Hall (Mr. Partridge’s assistant) for most of this informa¬
tion.

King, G. J., Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk. (A.S.C.) 1

It is believed to be a male but its origin is unknown.

The bird has been with Mr. King about six years.

Payne, C. M., Claverdon, Warwickshire. (Delves, Tony,

Chapel End, Nuneaton — new owner since May.) (A.S.C.) 1 1

This pair did not nest during 1969. They were both
bred by Mrs. Scamell so are not older than five years.

Marlow, E. N., Gedling, Notts. (A.S.C.) 1

This female remains of a wild caught pair obtained four

years ago. They were housed in a 10 x 8 ft. flight which

was planted. They received no heat in winter. For

the last two years this pair went to nest six times each

year and the clutch was always of three eggs. The nest

box Mr. Marlow describes as being of a small parrot type

20x12x10 in. and small twigs comprised the main

nesting material. It was usual for the male to eat the

eggs at about twelve days but he was removed prior to

this period of incubation on the last occasion, the female

did sit but no young hatched. The male later “ went

light ” and died.

Kelling Park Aviaries, Holt, Norfolk. (A.S.C.) 1 1 1

The male is wild caught, the female was bred by Mrs.

Scamell in 1962, and the unsexed is immature also bred
by Mrs. Scamell but from a different pair.

continued

d. t. spilsbury— Rothschild’s mynah, report on census 123

Country Name Address and Notes
Great Britain continued

Rosborough, S. J., Ballymena, Co. Antrim, N.I. (A.S.C.)
This pair was bred by Mrs. Scamell in 1968. No nesting
behaviour noted.

Sawyer, R. C. J., London. (A.S.C.)

This bird was bred by Capt. de Quincey, possibly in 1965.

Scamell, Mrs. K. M., Newdigate, Surrey. (A.S.C.)
Pair 1 wild caught male obtained in 1964, female in 1962.
This breeding pair has reared three in 1965, two in 1966,
three in 1 967 and no less than eight in 1 968. In 1 969 this
pair nested 11 times laying a total of 12 eggs in four of
these. The adults threw out three, three and two young
at varying stages of development from the three nests
that had nestlings. Pair 2 wild caught. Male exchanged
with Kelling Park Aviaries in early 1969 and was probably
imported in 1965, the female was purchased in 1962.
This breeding pair nested five times and hatched all five
eggs in two nests 3 and 2. One youngster was thrown
out but four left the nests and two survived. The
breeding pairs are housed in identical flights 8 ft. X

3 ft. 6 in. x 7 ft. high leading from a bird room heated
in winter to 40°F. Within the bird room is a shelter

4 x 4 x 6 ft. high, the flight and shelter being joined by a
pop-hole. The nest box is described as a Cockatiel nest
with an enlarged entry hole. Twigs are used to form the
bulk of the nest but it is finished off with a cup of fine
fibres or grasses. Mrs. Scamell attaches great import¬
ance to there being no disturbances whilst the female is
incubating and whilst the pair are rearing and she
advocates the prompt removal of young once they are
independent.

Stamps, D., Bilston, Staffs. (A.S.C.)

This bird has been with Mr. Stamps since December
1968, and was bred by Mrs. Scamell.

Winged World, Morecambe, Lancs. (A.S.C.)

This male is the survivor of a pair, probably wild caught,
that have been with Winged World since April 1967. In
1968 the pair hatched young which were thrown out of
the nest at about four days.

Zoological Society of London. (A.S.C.)

This is the survivor of a pair brfd and presented by the
Surabaya Zoo, Indonesia (presentation February 1961).
This bird is on loan to Mr. D. Castle for breeding
purposes. The male died from Pneumonia and abscess
of air-sac. The age of the longest lived specimen at
Regents Park was 12 years.

Lewis, E. C., London. (A.S.C.)

No return made but Mr. Lewis has exhibited a specimen
during 1969.

Manning, D., Ilkeston, Derby. (A.S.C.)

No return made but Mr. Manning has exhibited a
specimen during 1969.

S ? Sex

Male Female Unknown

I I

1

2 2 2

I

I

I

I

I

Hong Kong

Botanic Gardens, Hong Kong. (Vol. 10.) 1

No return made.

124 D* T* spilsbury — Rothschild’s mynah, report on census

Country Name Address and Notes

Indonesia

Kebun Raja Dan Kebun Binstang (Gembira Loka),

Jogjakarta, Java. (Vol. 8.)

No return made by this zoo either for the International
Zoo Yearbook census or the Avicultural Society census
since 1967. Indonesia, it must be remembered, contains
the natural wild habitat for the species and we can expect
to find that most, if not all, of the Indonesian zoos that
keep birds to have some specimens of L. rothschildi.

Apart from the zoo at Jogjakarta in Java, there are zoos
at Bandung, Jogjakarta (being relocated at Ragunan),

Surabaja (where Regents Park Zoo’s specimens were
bred), Semarang, Pematangsiantar, and Bukit Tinggi.

Information concerning the population of captive held
stock for Rothschild’s Mynah at all of these zoos is totally
lacking.

Netherlands

Royal Zoological Society, Natura Artis Magistra (Artis
Zoo), Amsterdam. (A.S.C.)

This pair were purchased from Basle Zoo in October
1964, where they were bred. There has been no
breeding attempt.

Wassenaar Zoo. (A.S.C.)

These two pairs are described as breeding pairs and in
1967 one pair had young in three nests but they were not
reared. Both pairs are wild caught and one specimen
has been in the collection since 1961. The pairs are
housed in single pairs in aviaries 2 x 2*5 x 2 m. which are
planted. Wooden nest boxes are offered for breeding.

South Africa

National Zoological Gardens of South Africa, Pretoria.

(A.S.C.) 2

These two females were obtained from Koln Zoo in

June 1965. In 1967 Koln sent to Pretoria a breeding

female and her single youngster. These were killed by

the two original birds when placed in their aviary. The

two females have nested in 1967 and 1968 sharing the

same box. Ten eggs were laid the first year and 12 in

1968.

Switzerland

Zoologischer Garten, Basel. (A.S.C.) 2 3

The breeding pair were wild caught in 1964 and have
bred in 1969 and possibly in previous years because five
of the total are captive bred at Basel. In 1969 the pair
nested four times hatching three, four, one and two.

Three young were reared and are thought to be females.

Breeding took place in a flight within a Bird House which
had access to an outside aviary which had a sand floor
and was planted. The floor inside was covered with peat
moss. The nest is described as a commercial starling
box. A few other birds of mixed species shared the
aviary. The young were removed after they had left
the nest about two weeks for the parents could be
dangerous. The oldest bird at Basel arrived in 1961.

1 1

2 2

<? $

Male Female

6 15

Sex

Unknown

3

continued

d. t. spilsbury— Rothschild’s mynah, report on census 125

Country Name Address and Notes

Switzerland — continued

Zoo Park Daehlhoelzli, Berne. (A.S.C.)

Both these specimens were captive bred. One was
purchased from Zurich zoo in April 1967, and the other
from Basel zoo in September 1968. It is assumed that
both are males.

Voliere Arboretum, General-Guisan-Quai 45, 8002

Zurich.

No L. rothchildi at this location A.S.C. 1970.

Zoo Zurich. (A.S.C.)

Mr. C. R. Schmidt sends very complete details about the
Rothschild’s Mynahs at Zurich. Pair 1 were wild
caught, the male arrived in November 1963, and the
female in May 1964. Prior to 1969 this pair reared 13
young. In 1969 pair 1 nested three times. Nest 1,
number of eggs not given but two young hatched and
reared. Nest 2, four eggs laid, three young hatched
and two raised. Nest 3, three eggs laid and two young
hatched and reared. This pair was housed in an open-
fronted avairy 12x10x3m. high, which is planted on
natural ground. Some 60 other birds of 20 species
share this flight. The nest box was of wood measuring
inside 15x15x15 cm. with an opening 5 cm. Nesting
material used; feathers and fine branches. The young
were removed when independent. This pair have
reared 19 young but the female died in July, 1969.

Pair 2 were captive bred at Zurich, from it is assumed,
pair 1. The male hatched in July 1966, the female in
September the same year. This pair was housed
during the summer in a planted aviary 4x3x3m. high.
This pair nested five times laying in each as follows:
Nest 1, three eggs laid, 1 young hatched but not reared.
Nest 2, number of eggs not given, two young were
hatched but not reared. Nest 3, four eggs laid, two young
were hatched and one fully reared. (This is second
generation captive bred and is almost certainly a stage
beyond any other owner outside Indonesia.) Nest 4,
three eggs were laid and two young were hatched but
not reared. Nest 5, three eggs were laid but the two
hatched young again were not reared. The youngster
was removed when independent. Recorded deaths for
adults at Zurich list visceral gout, general septicaemia
and parasitic worms as known causes. For young the
main cause of death was their eviction from the nest by
the parents between one and 10 days.

U.S.A.

Buffalo Zoological Gardens, New York. (A.S.C.)

This presumed pair were received as immature birds in
November 1967, from Mr. W. Lee-Lenz who bred
them.

Cheyenne Mountain Zoo, Colorado. (A.S.C.)

All birds at Cheyenne Mountain Zoo are wild caught
and arrived in November 1963. The pair have bred
to the extent of laying four eggs in April in the hollow
trunk of a dead pine tree which is 12 ft. high and 10 in.
in diameter and the actual nest is about 10 ft. from the
ground. This nest had been placed in the aviary in
December, 1968, and the Rothschild’s Mynahs had
immediately taken it over despite the presence of some
70 other birds of 30 species. In the past other types of

c? $ Sex

Male Female Unknown

2

4 2 7

I I

I I 4

continued

126 D. T. SPILSBURY - ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

Country Name Address ond Notes
U.S.A. — continued

nest boxes had been tried without any interest being
shown in them. The mynahs enlarged the nest cavity to
io in. deep and 5-6 in. inside diameter. The entrance
is 3 in. in diameter. No nesting material was used but in
enlarging the cavity the pair broke into a lower hole
through the base of their own nest and the eggs were lost.
The pair then covered the hole with feathers, string and
bits of paper but no further eggs were laid. The aviary
is described as a Free Flight Exhibit and is 24 x 18 x 14 ft.
high with tinted glass top at the southern interior of a
Bird House. The entire front of this flight is open so
that the birds may fly into the public area. The flight
has an earth floor covered with Vita-bark and is heavily
planted with tropical plants. The temperature is
regulated 70-75 °F. and humidity increased by the
presence of a large recirculating double pool.

Chicago Zoological Park, Illinois. (A.S.C.)

These birds are believed to be wild caught and arrived at
Brookfield between 1963-1966.

Columbus Zoological Gardens, Ohio. (A.S.C.)

These birds are believed to have been captive bred in
California; both were received as immature, one in
May 1966, and the other in July 1968.
Conservatory-Aviary, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (A.S.C.)
This pair were obtained from Mr. Alex Isenberg of
Portola Valley, California, in April, 1969, and are adult.
Mr. Roland W. Hawkins, aviculturist to the Con¬
servatory-Aviary, has written with the information that
L. rothschildi has been bred in the past but the adults
have been lost. The present pair have been placed in a
small planted “ habitat ” which is shared with com¬
patible species.

Lincoln Park Zoological Gardens, Illinois. (A.S.C.)
This single bird was purchased in July 1964, and is
thought to be wild caught.

Los Angeles Zoo, California. (A.S.C.)

These two birds were received from an aviculturist as
adults in June 1966. It is not known if they are wild
caught. They are housed in a large planted cage.
Milwaukee County Zoo, Wisconsin. (A.S.C.)

Mr. Joseph M. Iding, curator of birds, has sent these
details about Milwaukee’s success with this species.
The group consisting of two breeding pairs, a non¬
breeding pair and four immature are housed in a
50 x100 ft. planted, heated and air-conditioned com¬
munity flight with some 200 other birds of mixed species.
The two breeding pairs remain of six original birds
purchased from Holland in April 1965. The non¬
breeding pair now about 2 and 2,\ years old and were
bred, one each, from the breeding pairs. The immature
were bred from both pairs. In such a vast aviary close
inspection is scarcely feasible but in 1969 several nestings
by both pairs took place and pair 1 hatched three young,
pair 2 hatched two young and four from both pairs were
reared. Apart from 1968 when pair 1 laid four eggs in
one nest no other details about clutch sizes are available.
The nest boxes are described as Cockatiel type about
12x12x15 in. high. Recorded nesting material in¬
cludes leaves from plants, small twigs, bamboo, and
palm. Mr. Iding obviously feels he can better these

c? $ Sex

Male Female Unknown

2

2

I I

I

2

3 3 4

continued

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS 1 27

Country Name Address and Notes
U.S.A. — continued

results for he is planning to build four small flights for
the Rothschild’s Mynahs to breed under more controlled
conditions.

National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C. (A.S.C.)

The male was received from Cleres, France in 1969 and
its origin is unknown and the female’s origin and date of
arrival is unknown. The pair is housed in a large
planted community aviary, and in 1969 several nests
of eggs have been laid but no young have been reared to
independence. The nest, 8 x 6 x 6 in. with a hole 2 in. in
diameter, was in a rock wall. Causes of death recorded
for adult stock are: One adult after eight years in the
collection with pneumonia and one adult male died of
trauma as a result of fighting.

New York Zoological Society, Bronx Zoo, New York
City. (A.S.C.)

All five specimens were wild caught. Two males and
one female were received in November 1967, one male
in October 1961, and one female in December 1961.
There has been no breeding success at the Bronx due to
housing problems. Mr. Joseph Bell, Associate Curator
of Birds, hopes that the building programme now under
way (new planted aviaries and a really large building for
Passeriformes are referred to) will improve matters.

Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia. (A.S.C.)
This pair has bred for the last two years and four eggs
are laid in each clutch (in 1969 two nestings) these so far
have always been infertile. The pair is housed in a
community flight with natural planting and dirt flooring.
A hot air heating system in winter keeps the temperature
between 6o-yo°F. This flight is 50 x 30 x 20 ft. high.
The nest box is similar to a large parrakeet box and is
located high in a ficus tree. Mr. John A. Griswold,
curator of birds, writes that the female was purchased
from an English dealer in February 1962, and the male
exchanged for a female of the same species from the
National Zoo in June 1967. The female is doubtless
wild caught.

San Antonio Zoological Gardens, Texas. (A.S.C.)

The female is the survivor of a breeding pair which in
1968 reared to independence four young. Three of
these were killed by aggressive starlings and the other
was accidentally killed by a keeper closing a door. The
male died in a fight with a common starling. The female
was captive bred in Los Angeles and was purchased 1967.
The unsexed birds of unknown origin was purchased in
November 1968. The successful breeding of 1968
took place in a community aviary containing 40 birds
of 20 species. The aviary is described as being a planted
diorama of 20 x 20 x 10 ft. with a glass front. The floor
is sand covered which is kept moist with a sprinkler
system. Systems of controlled heating and air cooling
keep the desired temperature range. The next box had
dimensions of 12x12x18 in. and nesting material
included peat moss and dry leaves. The young when
independent were allowed to remain in the aviary.

$

Male Female

I

I

3

1 1

I

Sex

Unknown

I

continued

128 D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS

Country Name Address a d Notes
U.S.A. — continued

St. Louis Zoological Park, Missouri. (A.S.C.)

These two specimens were purchased from a dealer
approximately 4-5 years ago and they were then imma¬
ture. These birds are housed in well lit cage some
5 x 6 x 9 ft. with a sand covered floor. They have been
given a plywood parrot-size nest box, and for nesting
material have been offered cedar tow, alfalfa and timothy.
There has been no nesting behaviour.

San Diego Zoological Garden, California. (A.S.C.)
There are three pairs of Rothschild’s Mynah and one odd
male at San Diego (the latter, the survivor of the pair,
presumed wild caught, donated to San Diego by Dr.

K. C. Searle in October 1969, and which previously
were with Mr. W. R. Partridge). There have been no
young reared at San Diego since June 1967, and all 11
have been reared by a wild caught pair imported from
Surabaya in September 1961. In 1962 one reared, 1963
three reared, 1964 one reared, 1965 two reared, 1966 two
reared, 1967 two reared. It is interesting to note that all
these successes, except for July 1965 took place in June.
In 1962 when this pair first reared, Mr. Kenton C. Lint,
curator of birds, described the nesting behaviour in some
detail, and from February to June the pair nested five
times (twice eggs were laid but disappeared, twice young
hatched but were deserted, and finally came the success
of what is believed to be the first captive rearing of

L. rothschildi in the U.S.A.). Mr. Lint believes that
three eggs were laid each time but as the nest was
located behind a rock crevice this is conjecture based on
behavioural study. The nesting material used included
grasses, wool, pieces of yarn and leaves. The young
were not removed when independent and apart from the
Searle bird the Rothschild’s Mynahs at San Diego consist
of original parents and their young. All breeding took
place in the Rain Forest-Walk-Through Aviary. This
vast structure contains some 200 species of birds and is
167 x80 x110 ft. high. San Diego plans to construct
a special aviary for this species in 1970 as part of a special
conservation programme. Deaths of adults at San
Diego are attributed to Trauma (no information as to
the nature of this but probably injury from other birds).
The death of young is attributed to desertion by the
parents and pulmonary congestion.

San Francisco Zoological Society, California. (A.S.C.)
No information offered about these birds.

Tacoma Zoological Society, Washington. (Vol. 10 and
A.S.C.)

Three of these birds were bred by Mr. Lee Lenz some
years ago; the origin of the other bird is unknown.

Tampa. Busch Gardens Zoological Park, Tampa,
Florida. (Vol. 10.)

Presumed wild caught.

Woodland Park Zoological Gardens, Seattle, Washington.

(Vol. 9.)

No recent information.

cJ $ Sex

Male Female Unknown

2

4 3

2

2 2

1 1

2 2

Total

60 61 52

D. T. SPILSBURY — ROTHSCHILD’S MYNAH, REPORT ON CENSUS 1 29

I am grateful for the interest shown by the Embassy of the Republic
of Indonesia in this project.

Mr. Robert L. Kondik, Curator of Birds at Columbus Zoological
Gardens, and Mr. T. J. Riggs of Brooklyn, New York, helped in no small
measure to track down owners unknown to me.

My final, but by no means least, thanks to Mr. Colin Harrison who
helped me in so many ways to get this Register and 1969 Report back for
his editing almost on time!

* # #

BREEDING RESULTS IN
THE NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

By Philip Wayre, Director (Great Witchingham, Norfolk, England)

The 1969 breeding season in the Norfolk Wildlife Park was reasonably
successful with a total of 158 birds of 35 species reared to maturity.
The most important event of the season was undoubtedly the successful
breeding of three young Stone Curlews Burhinus 0. oedicnemus apparently
for the first time in captivity in this country and possibly in the world.
An adult pair, one of which was originally presented by the R.S.P.C.A.
having a damaged wing, are kept in the Wader enclosure. Last year
(1968) they laid two eggs from which one chick was hatched but failed
to survive the winter. The first egg this year was laid on 14th May and
the second two days later; within a week both eggs were removed and
incubated under a broody bantam. Two chicks hatched on 30th June
and were reared without difficulty on a diet of maggots and mealworms.
The adult laid again on 26th June, apparently only one egg, though a
second egg could have been taken by Jackdaws. The egg was once
again removed and incubated by a bantam. It hatched successfully and
the chick was reared without trouble. All three young birds are alive
and in good health at the time of writing.

A pair of Skylarks Alauda arvensis kept in a small planted aviary built
a nest and laid two eggs on 25th May, but both eggs were subsequently
eaten by field mice. The latter having been dealt with, the birds built a
new nest which was found to contain two eggs on 20th June. Both eggs
hatched on 30th June and one chick was reared to maturity the other
dying when five days old. It is the first time this species has bred in the
collection.

Other passerines to be bred include Wheatear Oenanthe 0. oenanthe
with one chick reared to maturity, Blackbird Turdus m. merula two,
Song Thrush Turdus ericetorum ericetorum four, Greenfinch Chloris c.
chloris three and Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula pileata two.

Both Azure- winged Magpies Cyanopica cyanus cooki and Alpine Choughs
Pyrrhocorax g. graculus again nested but the eggs of the former proved

130 P. WAYRE — BREEDING RESULTS IN THE NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

infertile. The Choughs hatched five young but one died at 14 days old.
The remainder of the brood were then removed and an attempt was made
to hand-rear them but this proved unsuccessful. The Azure-winged
Magpie, which escaped at Easter 1968, managed to survive the winter at
liberty and during the summer built a nest in a thorn bush a few yards
from the aviary containing one of the captive pairs. This bird is still
seen about the park from time to time.

Four young Red-breasted Geese Branta ruficollis were the first to be
bred in the collection. Other waterfowl reared include Swan Goose
Anser cygnoides , European White-fronted Goose Anser a. albifrons ,
Emperor Goose Anser canagicus, Greater Snow Goose Anser coerulescens
atlanticus , Taverner’s Canada Goose Branta canadensis taverneri , Barnacle
Goose Branta leucopsis , Common Shelduck Tadorna tadorna , Ashy¬
headed Goose Chloephaga poliocephala , Cereopsis Goose Cereopsis novae-
hollandiae , Red-billed Pintail Anas erythrorhyncha , Bahama Pintail Anas
bahamensis rubrirostris, Falcated Teal Anas falcata , European Wigeon
Anas penelope, Chiloe Wigeon Anas sibilatrix , Garganey Anas querquedula ,
Common Shoveler Anas clypeata , European Eider Somateria mollis sima
mollissima , Canvasback Ay thy a vallisneriay Ferruginous Ay thy a nyroca,
Mandarin Duck Aix galericulata.

A young Kestrel Falco tinnunculus , sole survivor from a brood of three,
was the first to be reared to maturity in the collection. This species is
very rarely bred in captivity although a brood was successfully reared in
1969 at the Falconry Centre in Gloucestershire. Previous records
include two definite and one doubtful breeding in captivity (Prestwich
I95S)-

Owls did well with five Barn Owls Tyto a. alba , nine European Eagle-
Owls Bubo b. bubo , seven Little Owls Athene noctua vidalii, and four
Tawny Owls Strix a. aluco , reared to maturity. Once again a young pair
of Eagle-Owls was presented to the German Nature Protection Authorities
for release in the Eifel area in an attempt to reintroduce the species there,
while a further two pairs are awaiting shipment to the Conservation
Authorities in Sweden for release in their forests. They will bring the
total of young Eagle-Owls bred in the Wildlife Park and sent to Sweden
for release to 18 since 1964.

Four of the young Barn Owls were released as soon as they were fully
fledged, their parents being kept inside the aviary and the young fed
every night outside on top of it. At the time of writing at least two of the
youngsters are known to be living in the vicinity and are still returning
nightly for their food six months after their release. Similarly five
Little Owls were released and at least one is known to come back every
night for the food left on top of its aviary.

REFERENCES

Prestwich, A. A. 1955. Records of birds of prey bred in captivity. 2nd Edn.,
London.

COUNCIL MEETING

!3I

COUNCIL MEETING

A Council Meeting was held on 20th March, 1970, at the Windsor Hotel,
Lancaster Gate, London, W.2.

The following Members were present: Dr. Jean Delacour, Vice-
President, in the Chair. Mr. J. J. Yealland, Vice-President. Miss
P. Barclay-Smith, Mr. J. O. D’eath, Mr. M. D. England, Mr. C. J. O.
Harrison, Mr. L. W. Hill, Mr. H. Horswell, Mr. K. A. Norris, Mrs.
K. M. S earned, Mr. D. T. Spilsbury, Mr. A. A. Prestwich, Hon. Secretary.

The Society’s Medal

The Society’s Medal was awarded to: Mrs. K. M. Scamell, for breeding
the Spotted- winged Stare Saroglossa spiloptera , in 1969; Mrs. K. M.
Scamell, for breeding the Indian Blue Chat Luscinia brunnea brunnea, in
1969; Mr. A. E. Hall, for breeding the Black-necked Starling Sturnus
nigricollis , in 1969; Mr. G. R. Pryor, for breeding the Blackish Rail Rallus
nigricans , in 1969.

Certificate of Merit

The Society’s Certificate of Merit was awarded to : The T ropical Bird
Gardens, Rode, for breeding the Scarlet Ibis Eudocimus ruber , in 1969;
B. Bertram (Sub-Department of Animal Behaviour, Cambridge), for
breeding the South Indian (Lesser) Hill Mynah Gracula religiosa indica ,
in 1968.

Elections

There were the following appointments: Vice-President: Miss P.
Barclay-Smith, M.B.E. Hon. Fellows: Mr. C. K. Lucas, Mr. K. A.
Norris and Mr. D. H. S. Risdon.

Obituary

Council has learned with profound regret of the deaths during the past
year of the following Members: Hon. Fellow: Mr. Lee S. Crandall (1938).
Members: Mr. Walter Bird (1952), Mr. Edward M. Boehm (i960), Mrs.
Alene S. Erlanger (1942), Mr. Pieter W. Louwman (1951), The Duke of
Palmella (1944), Mr. W. R. Partridge (1934), Mr. J. H. Reay (1947),
Mr. Walter H. Turner (1930).

Arthur A. Prestwich,

Hon. Secretary.

132

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

The one hundred and third Meeting of the Club was held at the Windsor
Hotel, Lancaster Gate, London, W.2, on Friday, 20th March, 1970,
following a dinner at 7.30 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. K. A. Norris.

Members of the Club present: S. J. Allum, *Miss P. Barclay- Smith,
A. W. Bolton, W. J. Bourne, R. A. Chester, F. Coombs-Goodfellow,
R. G. Crowe, J. O. D’eath, M. F. Draper, Mrs. W. Duggan, Miss R. M.
Ezra, R. H. Grantham, J. Hancock, R. T. Harvey, L. W. Hill, *Dr. E.
Hindle, Dr. J. R. Hodges, H. Horswell, P. Howe, *H. J. Indge, H. Jordan,
Dr. S. B. Kendall, H. G. Kenyon, Miss R. Low, #P. H. Maxwell,
N. O’Connor, P. J. Olney, W. J. Page, #A. A. Prestwich, Mrs. M. Reay,
D. M. Reid-Henry, K. M. Scamell, Mrs. K. M. Scamell, G. St. G.
Schomberg, Mrs. C. H. Seth-Smith, D. T. Spilsbury, N. R. Steel.

* Denotes Founder Member.

Members of the Club present, 38; guests, 34.

Members were able to welcome Dr. Jean Delacour making one of his
all too infrequent visits.

Mrs. K. M. Scamell showed the B.B.C. colour film “ The Incredible
Hummingbirds ”, with commentary by Peter Scott. L. W. Hill who,
with Mrs. Scamell, appears in the film, acted as projectionist. The Club
was very fortunate in that Len Hill brought as a guest Richard Brock,
the producer and director of the film.

Arthur A. Prestwich,

Hon. Secretary.

*

* #

NEWS AND VIEWS

David King has succeeded Lynn Hall, Jr., as President, Avicultural
Society of America.

# # *

Philip Wayre is at present spending three months in India filming for
a B.B.C. 2 series.

# # #

The Bronze Medal of the Zoological Society of London has been
awarded to P. B. Partridge, in recognition of forty years service to the
Society.

# * #

Mrs. Brenda Rhodes reports that two young Black-tailed Conures
Pyrrhura melanura have left the nest and have been removed from the
aviary, as the parents show signs of again nesting.

NEWS AND VIEWS

r33

The Association de la Presse Avicole et Horticole Beige has awarded
is annual Grand Prix, 1969, to Madame Georgette Swaenepoel, principally
in appreciation of her untiring administrative work in the production of

Le Monde des Oiseaux and De Vogelwereld.

# # #

Dr. JL. A. Swaenepoel, Lembeek, Belgium, reports that one of his
Bronze- winged Parrot Pionus chalcopterus hens has laid two lovely infertile
eggs which she is brooding diligently. He now has six pairs of Blue¬
bonnets, some of which are visiting the nests.

# # #

I usually report progress in the conservation of the Whooping Crane.
The first accurate census was taken in 1941 and revealed that only 1 5 birds
were to be seen wintering on the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, in

Texas. Last winter a record 55 wild Cranes returned.

# * #

R. T. Kyme reports that his Weber’s Lorikeets Trichoglossus haematod
weberi hatched two young ones on 25th February but, unfortunately, they
lived only three days. The parents are again sitting on a clutch of two

eggs. Latest arrivals are a pair of Perfect Lorikeets T. euteles.

# # #

The late Mrs. Alene Erlanger, formerly Treasurer, United States
Section, International Council for Bird Preservation, established a Medal
in honour of Dr. Jean Delacour, President Emeritus, I.C.B.P. The
Medal is awarded for services to ornithology, bird preservation and
aviculture. Miss P. Barclay- Smith was amongst the leading ornitho¬
logists that attended the dinner in the American Museum of Natural
History on 20th January, 1970, when Dr, Dean Amadon, Vice-Chairman
of the U.S. Section, presented the first award to Professor Konrad Lorenz.

# * *

Gleaned from the R.S.P.B. Report, 1969. White-tailed Eagle. The
four young ones taken to Fair Isle in June, 1968, had all disappeared by
September, 1969. One young bird was seen by fishermen on Fair Isle
coated in oil.

Osprey. Three pairs in Scotland each produced two young and other
pairs were prospecting.

Snowy Owl. The pair in the Fetlar Reserve, Shetland, again nested.
Six eggs were laid but only three young fledged; subsequently two died
from malnutrition and pneumonia.

# # #

John Wilson writes of his Pesquet’s Parrot: “ I have had my bird for
almost three years. It was in rough feather on arrival but is now getting
into first class condition, and is very tame. In the summer I keep it in a
large outside flight, with a shelter. It has had no artificial heat during the
winter when it is kept inside a frost-proof building in a good-sized flight.
Temperatures have fallen to i° C. at night, but it has thrived well. I feed

i34

NEWS AND VIEWS

it on Nectorfeed, Farex, sweetened milk and honey, also a large variety of
fruit and raw vegetables

# # *

One of the most interesting rearings at Chester Zoo last year was two
Red-masked Conures Aratinga rubrolarvata. The only previous successful
breeder seems to have been W. Shore-Baily who was awarded the Society’s
Medal for rearing two young ones in 1925. He was again successful in
the following year, number reared not recorded. Other birds reared
include one Sclater’s Curassow, one Louisiade Lorikeet, three Great
Eagle-Owls, three Crimson-winged Parrakeets, three Derbyan Parrakeets,
one Glossy Starling, and three Barnard’s — Pennant’s x Port Lincoln
Parrakeets. The Kookaburras hatched two young but failed to rear them.

* # #

News from the Tropical Bird Gardens, Rode. Donald Risdon writes,
23rd March, 1970: “ We already have two couples of Peacock Pheasant
chicks hatched and the full-winged Carolinas have full clutches which
they are just starting to incubate. I think this is the earliest I have ever
known for them. The full-winged Mandarins are not far behind.

I am glad to say that our two baby Scarlet Ibis have survived the winter
and are now showing a few pink feathers.

The Eagle-Owls are calling and have made a scrape, but so far no eggs.
The young pair of Cassowaries we bought last autumn have grown
fantastically during the winter. The smaller of the two, which I hope is a
male, is already turning black ”.

# # *

Paul Schneider, Riverside, California: “ Avicultural-wise 1969 was a
fair year. My wife hand-reared three Leadbeater’s Cockatoos; one Alba
Cockatoo, the egg of which was placed under a bantam for 25 days, and
for the remainder of the incubation period in an incubator. Two Grand
Eclectus (males), the eggs of which were incubated by the female for two
weeks, and the remainder in an incubator. The raising of two males
from the same clutch has proved to me that nest mates are not necessarily
true pairs. This also applies to doves and pigeons.

Two Indian Ring-necks and three African Greys were also hand-reared.
Successes were obtained with the albino and pied Cockatiels, Many-
coloured, Rock Peplars, lutino Ring-necks, Yellow-fronted Kakarikis
(20 reared), Green Jungle Fowl and Satyr Tragopans. A Hawk-headed
chick and a Port Lincoln chick were both lost at about seven days of age.

I lost my old Satyr Tragopan female on 25th November. I had her in
my possession for some 12 years. The party from whom I purchased her
had had her for some two or three years and she was an imported adult
when he obtained her. She produced every year.

On 8th June while attending the Avicultural Society Meeting at the Los
Angeles Zoo, thieves stole seven lutino, one blue and one split male Ring-
necks. On 27th June the State served us with condemnation papers on

NEWS AND VIEWS

*35

our home for highway construction. We are currently in an expensive
litigation with the bureaucracy over their confiscating ridiculous offer.
In the interim we have had to purchase another place and I spent eight
weeks of my vacation and accumulated time constructing 79 flights
(86 ft. x 1 12 ft.), and they are a long way from completion. I hope that

by the end of 1970 we will be living a normal life once more ”.

# # #

Ralph C. Small, Brookfield, Illinois: “ After nine years as parrot keeper
at the Chicago Zoological Park I have been transferred to the mammal
department. During this time the following birds were raised to maturity
in the parrot house — 6 Crimson-winged Parrakeets, 64 Nyasa Lovebirds,
1 lutino Nyasa, 19 Swainson’s Lorikeets, 2 Eastern Rosellas, 11 Red and
Yellow x Blue and Yellow Macaws, 13 Hawk-headed Caiques, 2 Cockatiels,
5 Roseate Cockatoos, 5 Plum-headed Parrakeets, 1 Jendaya x Golden¬
headed Conure, and 3 Bourke Parrakeets.

My biggest thrill was in 1969 when the Hyacinthine Macaws hatched an
egg, but the chick lived for only about z\ days. I do not think the parents
fed it. I was looking forward to the opportunity to try again this year.
The remarkable thing about all these breedings is that they took place in
the parrot house in cages 5 ft. x 5 ft. x 7 ft. high, except for the Macaws —
they were in cages 5 ft. x 8 ft. x 9 ft. high. Even more remarkable the
public could reach over the guard rail and feed the birds. This tends
to make some very nervous and they would refuse to go to nest. Some
would lay and hatch their eggs, and then either kill or throw out the babies
or refuse to feed them. The abandoned babies were, with permission,
hand-reared by my wife and myself. It was a very satisfying experience
to watch the tiny babies grow into beautiful adult birds.

The temperature during the winter was kept between but

in the summer it went up as high as no° F. I always kept a night light
on in the building to prevent injury in the dark. During the years other
birds were brought into the building to be reared. To name a few, five
Emus, one Darwin’s Rhea, 18 Wild Turkeys, some pheasants, ducks,
geese, swans, quail and peafowl. The past nine years have been quite
rewarding for it is an experience too few are able to have. It is my hope
that some time in the future I will again be able to care for a large collection
of parrots A. A. P.

136

REVIEW

REVIEW

PATTERNS OF REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR. By Desmond
Morris. London: Jonathan Cape, 1970. Price 84$.

This is a collection of 14 articles which have appeared in various
scientific journals, some out of print. Nine deal exclusively with repro¬
ductive patterns and the other five, although covering a wider field, are
included because they have an important bearing on this subject.

Aviculturists will be specially interested in those chapters dealing with
birds. The very complex reproductive behaviour of the Zebra Finch is
described in detail based on the study of 23 individuals, nine of which
were bred in the laboratory. In addition the occurrence of the same or
similar markings in other Australian grass-finches is illustrated diagram-
matically by a comparison of 22 related species. Whilst many of the
component markings are shared between several species, each possesses a
unique combination of markings.

The function and causation of courtship ceremonies contains a number
of examples among birds as well as other groups of vertebrates. The
feather postures of birds and the problem of the origin of social signals
is of especial interest in the interpretation of the social behaviour of birds.
“ Typical intensity ” and its relation to the problem of ritualization is
followed by a long chapter on the reproductive behaviour of the Bronze
Mannikin. Other chapters confined to the study of birds include one on
the courtship of pheasants and a long account of the comparative ethology
of grass-finches and mannikins. But most of the other chapters also
contain references to birds in the discussions on the reproductive behaviour
of vertebrate species. The response of animals to a restricted environ¬
ment will be of especial interest to those concerned in the care of wild
animals, many in laboratories and zoological gardens. E. H.

# * #

The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles,
notes, or correspondence.

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY: 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier

PRICES OF ADMISSION
Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicultura! Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 4s. {non-members) Children: 2/6

Parties of 25 and over: 2/6 each Organised school parties: 1/6 each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance
NO DOGS ALLOWED

HOW TO GET TO THE WILDLIFE PARK

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A36 at The Fled Lion, Woolverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

OPEN DAILY
including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

No dogs admitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 326

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

{Established 1956)

Invites your membership. Subscription $2.00 Aust. Due on the
1 st January each year. Magazine dealing with all aspects of
aviculture posted each month. Back issues supplied where
available.

Send application to:

The Secretary: W. L. Burns, P.O. Box 55, Morley, 6062,
Western Australia.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the :

Hon Secretary, Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone: Henlow Camp 342

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members' advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement , which must be sent to A. A. Prestwick, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column , but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable.

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

Members of the Society have the exclusive privilege of joining
the Club. Members normally resident abroad are invited by
the Club to regard themselves as temporary members and to
attend any meetings during a visit to this country.

Members of the Society not already members of the Club
should write to the Hon. Secretary for particulars of membership.

When Visiting the

COTSWOLDS

A VI CULT URI STS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

The Avicultural Society of America

Founded 1 927

Hon. President: Dr. Jean Delacour.

President: Mr. David King
Secretary: Richard C. Frantzen,

13914 Don Julian Road, La Puente, California 91746, U.S.A.

The Society year begins January 1st, but new members may join
at any time and are entitled to the back issues of the AVICULTURAL
BULLETIN, Roster for the current year and a copy of the By Laws.
One membership includes husband and wife. The annual dues
for domestic (Canada & Mexico included) membership are $4.00.
Foreign dues are $5.00. Please send remittance to the Membership
Secretary, Mrs. Marian Wagner, 565 East Channel Rd., Santa
Monica, California 90402. Make your check payable to
Avicultural Society of America. Foreign applicants please remit
dues by International Bank Draft or Money Order only.

The Avicultural Society of South Australia

Founded 1928

The oldest Avicultural Society in Australia invites all interested in
aviculture to become members. Subscription is £ 1 5 s. 0 d. sterling
per annum, and this includes a monthly magazine Bird Keeping
in Australia mailed to all members. This is entirely original and deals
with the keeping and breeding of many Australian and exotic
species of birds.

Please forward membership application and subscription to the
Secretary, Eric Baxter, 17 Benjamin Street, Manningham,

South Australia, 5086.

The Avicultural Society of Australia

Catering for the English-speaking breeders of Australian birds
throughout the world. Monthly magazine Australian Aviculture
posted free to all members.

Overseas subscriptions : United States of America, $3.00;
all other countries, Aust. $2.50.

Secretary, Frank A. Ripper 10 Tyne Street, Burwood,

Victoria, 3125, Australia.

A Guide to the
Names of Parrots

A complete list of the scientific names admitted by
Peters, together with their derivations and
appropriate English names.

Price 5s. 6d post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

STUDIES ON GREAT CRESTED
GREBES
By

K. E. L. SIMMONS
Price 5/6 post free
❖

PUBLISHED BY

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

GALLEY’S WOOD
EBENBRIDGE, KENT

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGSDEN BIRD GARDENS

The largest private collection of ornamental game birds in the
British Isles, also Waterfowl and Rare Breeds of Poultry, etc.

Open every day

10 a.m. to 7 p.m. or sunset if earlier

Send 3/- for a 40 -page brochure

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422
The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Tel.: Oakley 2745

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10-14
Macklin Street, London, W.C.2, to whom members should address all orders
for extra copies and back numbers. Subscription and back number orders from
non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., $6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wykeham
Press, 85 High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained, price 15s. each, postage extra. Alternatively the
printers can undertake the binding of complete current volumes (for which they
have binding cases in stock), price £2 per volume, postage extra. They can
also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for which
binding cases have to be specially made), price £2 10s., postage extra. Members
are requested to state whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be
bound with the volume.

NEW MEMBERS

The fifty-one Candidates for Membership in the March-April, 1970, number of
the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

AMENDED AND CORRECTED ADDRESSES
Mrs. Doris E. Balcon, 39 Hillington Gardens, Woodford Green, Essex.

Dr. Giuseppe Cigna, 92100 Agrigento, Via Cesare Battisti 1, Italy.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Oliver E. Clements, to 1 Bayswater Road, Highlands, Salisbury, N.E. 70,
Rhodesia.

Loic Francois Marie Hervouet, to United Nations B.P. 1.54 — Dakar, Senegal.
William John Howse, to “ Sunnyside ”, Over Norton, Chipping Norton, Oxon.
T. J. Le Breton, to La Ruette, Queen’s Road, St. Helier, Jersey, Channel Islands.
Yves U. Leonard, to La Baysade, 82-Montech, France.

Neil Macleod, to Old School House, Stenton, East Lothian, Scotland.

P. H. Maxwell, to c/o Lloyds Bank, Ltd., 39 Old Bond Street, London, W.i.
Karl Plath, to 3652 Pine Grove Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60613, U.S.A.

T. D. Rothery, to Birchcliffe, Stanah Road, Thorrton, Nr. Blackpool FY5 5JG.
John Trevor Walton, to “ Lyndhurst ”, Wynnstay Lane, Marford, Nr. Wrexham,
Denbighshire.

S/Ldr. Hubert John West, to The Mill House, Mill Lane, Alvescot, Oxford
0X8 2QJ.

Brian M. Williams, to Tinganga Estate, P.O. Box no, Kiambu, Kenya, E. Africa.

READMITTED

Ellis W. Thornley, 4 Weeroona Avenue, Elanora Heights, N.S.W., Australia
2101.

Alfred L. Wheeler, Firestone Plantations Company, Herbel, Liberia, West
Africa.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

John S. Ambrose, 33 Lewis Road, Wantirna South Victoria, 3152, Australia.
Proposed by J. J. Walsh.

J. A. Balls, 58 Acacia Road, Leamington Spa. Proposed by A. G. Perkins.
George Neville Bowman-Shaw, Toddington Park, Toddington, Beds. Proposed
by Terry Jones.

M. Aslam Bukhari, n8-2nd Floor, Jamli Mohalla, Bombay~3BR., India.
Proposed by H. B. Wragg.

Mrs. Andre Capi, 3300 56th Court, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33308, U.S.A.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Horace B. Collins, Barney’s Animal Kingdom, 144 Main Street, Carrbord,
North Carolina, 27510, U.S.A. Proposed by Douglass F. Dewey.

M. Darmagnac, Rue du Maupas, Nevers 58, France. Proposed by J. G. Nicoul-
laud.

J. F. Doughty, 17 Birch Avenue, Cannock, Staffs. Proposed by C. J. O. Harrison.
Hugh Elliot, Flat 3, 8 Wood Street, Manly, N.S.W. 2095, Australia. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

John Formosa, 8 Barcelona Street, Norlane, Geelong, Victoria 3214, Australia.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Paul H. Francis, 37 Douglas Street, N. Blackburn, Victoria 3130, Australia.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Viscountess Dorothea Head, Throope Manor, Bishopstone, Salisbury, Wiltshire.
Proposed by Len Hill.

Frank Y. C. Hung, Trandar House, 525 Crookesmoor Road, Sheffield SIO IBJ.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Murray Johnstone, “ Green Banks ”, Holbeach Hurn, Spalding, PE12 8JD Lines.
Proposed by E. O. Squire.

Rene N. Jones, The University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Science, Depart¬
ment of Zoology, London 72, Canada. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Finn Nicolin, 2770 Copenhagen-Kastrup, Kongellundsvej 268, Denmark.
Proposed by Aage V. Nielsen.

J. Packman, 32 Pitfold Road, Lee, London, S.E.12. Proposed by Miss K.
Bonner.

Jeffrey Powell, 21 Brabant Road, Cheadle Hulme, Cheadle, Cheshire. Proposed
by G. F. Powell.

Miss Joan M. Robinson, 148 Gorsey Lane, Warrington, Lancashire. Proposed
by Miss K. Bonner.

H. Roe, 33 Weddington Road, Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Proposed by A. G.
Perkins.

Barry A. Simpson, i Bethel Street, Ormond, Melbourne, Victoria 3204, Australia.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Peter Tambakis, 57 West 174 Street, Bronx, N.Y. 10453, U.S.A. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

Arthur John Wright, 90 Thurbern Road, Northend, Portsmouth, Hants.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

DONATIONS
(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

Dr. C. Almandoz
Dr. E. Beraut
Mrs. E. J. Birchall
Miss R. Bissell
Dr. B. D. Blood
W. J. Bourne
A. Bowley
L. Cox

Mrs. W. Duggan
R. H. Grantham

R. Nelson
Mrs. F. M. Poe
E. A. Read
Dr. D. F. Sharman
Dr. N. P. Sholar
R. O. Smith
A. F. Sturgis
J. G. Weeks
L. W. Wickline
Jesse D. Willmott

Dr. D. B. Greene

A. R. Gregory

H. Jordan

F. E. B. Johnson

L. W. Lenz

Dr. P. Mantegazza

Dr. G. F. Mees

Miss M. O. Merry

Sir Crawford McCullagh, Bt.

Mrs. K. McKeever

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

59^' 2.6S9-2-

H'J'i*

PJjL

AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 4
JULY-AUGUST
1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

PAGE

On the Little Bee-eater, (with coloured plate), by Derek Goodwin . . 137

Breeding the Little Bee-eater Merops pusillus at the Winged World, by

Clive Roots ........ . 139

Breeding the Black-tailed Conure ( Pyrrhura melanura ), by Mrs. Brenda

Rhodes ........... 141

Breeding the Rufous Laughing-Thrush ( Garrulax caerulatus ), by A. H.

Isenberg . 143

Breeding the Southern Tree Pie at the Winged World, by Clive Roots 144

Breeding the Brown-throated Barbet at Winged World, by Clive Roots 145

Breeding the Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeon at the Winged World, by

Clive Roots . .146

Breeding the African Song Sparrow and Green Singing Finch in Australia,
by J. J. Walsh . 147

Hand-rearing and Keeping Baby Swallows, by John Mallet . . . 148

Birds at Sea, by Alan Booth . . . . .149

Escapes, by Derrick England . . . . . . .150

The Massena’s Parrot, (with plate), by Rosemary Low . . . . 153

Australian Parrots: Problems and Studies, (with plate), by Harry Frauca 155

Breeding Robins, by Frank Meaden . . . . . . .158

Breeding the Yellow-wattled Brush Turkey in North America, by Michael

Flieg . .161

British Aviculturists’ Club . . . . . . . .163

News and Views .......... 164

Review ............ 167

Notes ............ 168

Correspondence . . . . . . . . . .169

the avicultural society

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, M.B.E., 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.
Assistant Editor: C. J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

Avicult. Mag,

Little Bee-eater

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 76. — No. 4. — All rights reserved . JULY-AUGUST 1970

ON THE LITTLE BEE-EATER

By Derek Goodwin (London, England)

My qualifications for writing about the Little or Least Bee-eater {Merops
pusillus ), are (as I have fully explained to our fair Editor, so blame her
not me!) based on nostalgia rather than knowledge. I have seen the
species only once, and long ago, but my memory of it is vivid.

In May 1941, as a young soldier, I spent a fortnight at Clairewood
Camp, near Durban, South Africa. As Army life went it was a brief period
of almost unimaginable luxury sandwiched between the rigours of six
weeks on a troopship from England and the war in the Middle East. For
me a very large fly in the otherwise temporarily soothing ointment was
that I had no field glasses. As my readers are, no doubt, also bird-
addicts, I need not enlarge on this misfortune for it to be appreciated by
them!

At the first opportunity I was, of course, away into the surrounding
countryside looking for birds and other creatures. Most of the birds
kept at what was, for me in my binocular-less state, a tantalizing distance.
Then, as I was wandering over some grassland dotted with scrubby
bushes, a flash of bronze and green caught my eye. I saw the bird settle
and, to my delight, it and its four companions stayed settled and allowed
me to approach to within about 8 ft. and feast my eyes on them.

I can recall even now that I was trembling with excitement and, no
doubt, with fear lest they should fly away before I had noted down their
appearance. I had never in my life seen birds like them before, and
although I realized that they were bee-eaters of some species I had no idea
which, except for realizing that they were certainly not the Bee-eater
( Merops apiaster) of my British bird books. Having hastily made rough
sketches and “ colour maps ” of them I settled down to a pleasurable
few minutes (till they flew further off) watching them. Later I saw
Green, Blue-cheeked and European Bee-eaters ( M . viridis, M. super-
ciliosus and M. apiaster ) in Egypt but, beautiful as they were, none of
them made so clear and lasting an impression on me as those five Little
Bee-eaters in Natal. The Little Bee-eater is not, perhaps, quite so
striking as some of its relatives but, as the accompanying plate shows, it is
a lovely bird and, of course, quite different from any species I had seen
before.

N

DEREK GOODWIN - ON THE LITTLE BEE-EATER

138

The Little Bee-eater has a wide range in Africa, being found from just
south of the Sahara in West Africa east to Ethiopia and Somaliland south
to Natal. It is an inhabitant of savanna woodland and scrubby arid
country. In South Africa it is fond of the vicinity of water (Roberts).
Like other bee-eaters the nest is in a burrow of a bank, often quite a low
one, and sometimes in the roof of an ant-bear hole. Bees, wasps and other
insects, mostly caught on the wing are its food, as with most other bee-
eaters.

A bee-eater that has captured a venomous bee or wasp takes it to a
perch and prepares it by beating its head against the perch, then gripping
it by the tip of the abdomen and rubbing it against the perch to express
the venom from the sting. The bird then beats the bee’s head one or
more times again and then swallows it. Fry (1969$), from whose paper
these feeding details are abstracted, found that the movements are innate
but improve with practice. Non-venomous insects are given much less
elaborate treatment. Fry’s detailed experiments were made on the
Red-throated Bee-eater (M. bullocki) but he mentions having seen the
same behaviour from wild bee-eaters of several other species, including
M. pusillus. There is, however, evidence that some of the larger bee-
eaters sometimes take bees in continuous flight but it is not known how
they then prepare them for swallowing (Fry, 1969ft).

It has been claimed that the European Bee-eater is immune to bee
and wasp stings, but Fry suggests that, at least in the Red- throated Bee-
eater, this immunity is only partial, as a young bird that was, apparently,
stung by the first few bees it ate, showed signs of distress.

At one time the bee-eaters were divided into several genera mainly on
the differing shapes of their tails and the present species was put in the
genus Melittophagus. Fry (1969 6), however, puts the Little Bee-eater,
along with most of the others, in the genus Merops. I conclude with
references to papers which are recommended to those wishing to learn
further about birds of this interesting and colourful genus.

REFERENCES

Fry, C. H. 1969ft. The recognition and treatment of venomous and non-
venomous insects by small bee-eaters.

Fry, C. H. 19696. The evolution and systematics of bee-eaters ( Meropidae ).
Koenig, L. 1951. Beitrage zu einem Aktionssystem des Bienenfressers ( Merops
apiaster L.). Z. Tierpsychol. , 8, 169-210

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE LITTLE BEE-EATER

*39

BREEDING THE LITTLE BEE-EATER AT THE
WINGED WORLD

( Merops pusillus)

By Clive Roots (Morecamb, Heysham, Lancs.)

As so often happens these days, due to building delays, the very short
period between the completion of an animal building and its opening to the
public seldom allows time to provide the most suitable environment for the
inmates. This was the case at the Winged World foui years ago, and only
after the building was open were we able to concentrate on providing more
suitable quarters for birds with exacting requirements. One of the first
jobs to be tackled was the construction of an artificial wall for tunnel-nesting
birds, bee-eaters in particular, although few shared our optimism that these
birds could be induced to breed in indoor community cages. This
seemingly simple task of providing nesting sites for tunnellers involved the
use of three tons of rock and seven tons of soil. This was carried piece by
piece and sackful by sackful along a tortuous route at least one hundred
yards from the nearest access point, up a slope, two flights of steps and
through two narrow doorways. Some of the rocks weighed almost two
hundredweight.

It was built into a wall in which gaps, approximately one foot square,
were left. These were later covered with a wire-mesh screen in which
small holes were left, and a weak plaster mixture, dyed the colour of the
rocks, was trowelled over the screen. A retaining wall was then built about
six feet behind this rock face, and the gap between filled with soil and
planted. Vines were also planted in crevices left between the rocks. The
soil soon became quite impacted and birds perching on the lip of the two-
inch diameter entrance holes were confronted with a solid mass of soil into
which they could tunnel.

Four Little Bee-eaters were housed in this exhibit, but far from being
occasionally gregarious, as they apparently sometimes are in the wild state,
the first pair to come into breeding condition would not tolerate the
presence of the others. Their first nesting attempt, in the spring of 1969,
was unsuccessful as they chose one of the holes nearest the top of the wall.

The depth of soil over their tunnel was therefore no more than a few
inches, and as we feared, the front part of their tunnel collapsed soon after
they started feeding their young. Shortly afterwards a group of five
Carmine Bee-eaters were obtained from West Africa and placed in this
exhibit, but in the spring of this year the Little Bee-eaters became so
aggressive that it was necessary to remove the several times larger Carmine
Bee-eaters for their own safety. Both Little Bee-eaters were observed
excavating a new tunnel, once again near the top of the wall, in the middle
of March. Towards the end of the month it became apparent that egg-
laying and possibly incubation had commenced, because of the long period

140

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE LITTLE BEE-EATER

of absence of one of the birds. As far as we could tell incubation started on
4th April, and on the 25th of the month the first of the many visits to the
tunnel with food commenced. Both parents fed the nestlings with meal¬
worms, mealworm pupae and blowflies. Crickets and locusts were also
offered but were ignored. From entering the nest-hole with food to
reappearing again no more than four seconds elapsed, and often only three,
so we naturally assumed that the tunnel was short, possibly about eighteen
inches long, but we never took the risk of inspecting the entrance hole or
tunnel during incubation and rearing for fear of upsetting the birds.

The other species in their compartment — breeding pairs of Fairy Blue
Birds and Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeons — plus pairs of Van den Bocks
Pittas and Scimitar Babblers, were never aggressive towards the Bee-eaters.
The Babblers, however, were a nuisance because of their continual
investigation of the tunnel entrance, no doubt out of curiosity as they had
never molested the more vulnerable Pigeon and Blue Bird nestlings. On
many occasions the Bee-eaters had to wait until the Babblers had moved
away before they could enter the hole, so the latter were removed.

During the early days of rearing two dozen trips with food, on several
occasions daily were observed, yet towards the latter part of the rearing
period the food-carrying visits became less frequent, and we were concerned
that some of the nestlings may have been lost. Even a few days before the
young eventually emerged we witnessed no more than a handful of visits
with food daily.

Obviously the bulk of the feeding was done in the many hours of
daylight before and after our normal working hours. After a rearing period
of exactly 28 days three nestlings appeared. One was a poor flier, another
could manage reasonably well, although it could not perch, and both
consequently spent most of the time on the floor. The third nestling was
poorly feathered and replaced in the tunnel. The nestlings at this stage
were green above, had a black eye streak, brownish white throat, and pale
green underparts streaked with green on the breast. They were the same
size as the adults, but their bills were short and straight. Two days later
the most backward of the two still out of the tunnel disappeared, and we
assumed it had returned to the nest. This proved to be correct, for the
following day saw the reappearance of this and the third nestling. Neither
could fly properly, and as it soon became obvious that the parents were
ignoring them they were removed. One died within the hour, but the
poorly feathered one was successfully hand reared. This breeding
attempt therefore reached a successful conclusion as the other youngster
was reared to independence by the parents.

As described above the Little Bee-eater ( Merops pusillus) has been bred
at the Winged World. It is believed this may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species in
Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

BRENDA RHODES — BREEDING THE BLACK-TAILED CONURE

I4I

BREEDING THE BLACK-TAILED CONURE

( Pyrrhura melanura )

By Mrs. Brenda Rhodes (Sowerby, Yorkshire, England)

The size of these birds is about io in. They are a lovely dark green
with a large white eye ring, beaks and feet are grey, a wide collar of creamy
white tipped feathers, some maroon feathers on the abdomen, long flight
feathers are dark bluish, underwings are scarlet, and the tail is dark
maroon.

There is no apparent difference in the sexes; when I bought mine I
sexed them by the pelvic bone method. Possibly the hen’s head is very
slightly flatter than the cock’s, and my hen has more maroon feathers on
her abdomen. There is no difference in the behaviour of my pair when
not breeding.

They live in a flight in the bird hut next to a pair of Moustached
Parrakeets. It is only a small flight about 3 ft. x 3 ft- 3 in. x 6 ft. high.
Also in the hut there are cages of Lovebirds, Budgerigars, one pair of
Aymara Parrakeets, one pair of Tovi Parrakeets and one pair of Plumhead
Parrakeets in a flight at the other end of the hut. There are also Waxbills
and Finches flying free in the work space of the hut.

The hut is heated and the temperature is about 58°F. They are nice
quiet birds. Their normal diet is sunflower seed with apple, grated carrot
and millet sprays. They were always given budgie seed but never touched
it until they started to breed. As they like to chew wood they always
have a supply of willow twigs to save their perches, etc.

I bought these birds in July 1968. They were given a nest box on
1st December 1968, size about 9 in. square, 18 in. deep with 2 in. peat
in the bottom, but did not go near it for about three months when they
started to sleep in it at night. At the end of October 1969 the hen started
to go into the box during the day. They were seen mating on more than
one occasion during January 1970. On 1st February I think she laid her
first egg and started to sit. There was no chance of looking into the
nest box unless I looked while she was sitting, so I did not take that risk
and did not see her again until the babies were about 10 days old.

On 26th February I first heard faint squeakings coming from the nest
box. Also at that time the cock started to be plucked till at the end of
one week he was bald.

As soon as I heard the first squeaking I gave them extras, soaked
safflower seed, soaked millet sprays, and they started to eat a little
budgie seed. I gave them soft food made of canary rearing food, P. Sluis
c.l.o., grated carrot, grated cuttlefish bone (as the parents never touch
the cuttlefish bone), all mixed with water, also extra apple. I always

142

BRENDA RHODES — BREEDING THE BLACK-TAILED CONURE

put Cytacon and Abidec drops in the water of all my birds that are
feeding young.

I heard the babies being fed at some time every day and at six weeks
old could hear them trying their wings in the nest. Then at seven weeks
old the first baby was out in the flight when I went into the hut. The
hen stays in the nest box with the young most of the time.

The baby is just a bit smaller than the parents, with a shorter tail but
like them in plumage except there is not as much scaly marking round the
throat and this is much fainter. The beak is just a bit paler and has a
small lump on each side of the top beak (I expect its just not hardened
up yet). I am very pleased to say that they are not plucked at all and
look perfect, the red in the wings and the rest of the colouring seems just
as bright as that of the parents.

The babies went back into the nest often at first and they all sleep in the
nest at night. Seeing just one baby for a few days and thinking it the
only one, I looked into the nest box to find another baby and one egg, so
with the egg found in the flight about two weeks before, it would seem
she laid four eggs and hatched and reared two babies.

At eight weeks old, on the first day the youngest was out of the nest for a
while, the parents were seen mating again. The babies continued to
thrive for a few more days, but as I thought the parents wanted to go to
nest again and the young ones seemed to be feeding themselves, I took
them away and brought them into the house in a cage to keep my eye on
them for a while. They have now been on their own and eating for
themselves for four days and are still keeping fit and well They are both
inquisitive and lively, and I am very thrilled with them.

Mr. Clifford Smith of Denholm came to see my birds while the young
were being reared in the nest, then he came again to see them when they
had fledged and saw both babies in the flight with their parents. He is in
agreement with me that they are beautiful youngsters.

As described above, Mrs. Brenda Rhodes has bred the Black-tailed
Conure ( Pyrrhura melanura). It is believed this may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

A. H. ISENBERG - BREEDING THE RUFOUS LAUGHING-THRUSH

H3

BREEDING THE RUFOUS LAUGHING-THRUSH

( Garrulax caerulatus )

By A. H. Isenberg (Portola Valley, California, U.S.A.)

These handome Rufous Laughing-thrushes ( Garrulax caerulatus) come
from Formosa. The head, back, wings and tail are a uniform brown,
the throat paler and more beige, the belly greyish, and the under tail
coverts white. The birds have blue skin around and behind the eye, and
a black or very dark blue streak under the eye. The bill is yellow with a
dark base. There are white tips on the two outermost tail feathers which
can be revealed when the tail is flicked and partly expanded. Although
the sexes are alike they can easily be sexed by separating the birds and
listening to their call-notes. The female starts with one note and then
five to seven higher notes which the male will usually answer immediately
with varied musical notes.

I have had this pair for nearly five years and in the last three six young
ones were reared, nine having been hatched. One I hand-reared and it
was the most charming pet and loved having its feathers scratched; but
unfortunately it succumbed to gapes at the age of 14 months. It twice
recovered pretty well after I had swabbed its throat and trachea with
Listerine and Vick’s formula 44, but the third attack was fatal. The other
five young were well-grown and had become independent when I found
two drowned in their shallow pond, another hung itself, and the last one
went through a hole in the wire-netting into the next aviary and was killed
by a magpie.

The birds built on the first occasion a deep cup-shaped nest in a bamboo
thicket at about five feet from the ground, using sticks, bamboo leaves,
grass and horse-hair. Four blue eggs were laid each time, and the same
nest was used for three sittings between April and July. A new nest
was built in almost the same spot in the second year. Last year only one
sitting occurred with three eggs and all hatched but none lived beyond
eight days. The nest was built in their shelter in a thick Ficus vine.

Live crickets and mealworms were given ; and also meat and hard-boiled
egg with toasted wheat-germ, some fruit, and peanuts.

At the time of writing I have only the parents and can only hope they
will nest again this year. I believe this to be a first breeding of these
birds and would like to hear if anyone else has been this fortunate.

144

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE SOUTHERN TREE PIE

BREEDING THE SOUTHERN TREE PIE AT THE
WINGED WORLD

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

We imported a pair of this attractive species from Bombay three years
ago, but on several occasions were tempted to dispose of them due to
their destructive habits. With the exception of the oropendolas and
aracaris they are possibly the most destructive of all the many species of
softbills that we have attempted to house in our exotically-planted aviaries.
Eventually it became necessary to move them to a plantless aviary
designated specifically for plant wreckers. The Southern Tree Pie
(Dendrocitta leucogaster) is a splendid black, white and coffee coloured
species with a tail almost 12 in. long. They are seldom available to
aviculture even though they are apparently fairly common in the Southern
part of India. I have never found them to be aggressive towards other
birds, even species much smaller than themselves, and for once the
frustrations experienced, before we eventually succeeded in breeding these
birds in the summer of 1969, were not due to the close proximity of other
birds. A small wire mesh basket was provided, into which twigs and
other nest materials had been interwoven. All but the sturdiest outer
twigs were removed by the birds and they were completely disinterested
in the wide variety of other nesting materials which were offered. Eggs
were eventually laid on the bare mesh and of course were soon cracked.
A sod of turf solved the problem, as it withstood removal attempts and
provided a relatively soft base for the eggs which were off-white and
heavily streaked with black and brown.

Two chicks hatched after an incubation period of 19 days. Maggots,
mealworms and crickets were provided, but the most acceptable form of
food, from the day they hatched, were young mice, which the parents
dismembered and gave to the chicks in minute pieces. Eighteen days were
spent in the nest, and the youngsters at this stage resembled the adult
birds minus their long tails. The over-zealous hen commenced plucking
them soon afterwards, and it became a race against time whether they
would be plucked bare before they were completely independent. Four¬
teen days after leaving the nest they were left with only their primary
feathers and we had no alternative but to move them. By this time they
had commenced to feed independently, however, and it was not necessary
to hand feed them. After rearing these youngsters the parents became
dissatisfied with their nesting facilities and on one occasion removed all
nesting material when they had young in the nest. Once on the aviary
floor these nestlings were regarded as a source of food and were soon
killed by the Tree Pies themselves. Fortunately, the nesting problem
has been solved once more by wiring hessian into the bottom of their
basket and they have bred again.

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE SOUTHERN TREE PIE

145

As described above the Southern Tree Pie ( Dendrocitta leucogaster ) has
been bred at the Winged World. It is believed this may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species in
Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

# # #

BREEDING THE BROWN-THROATED BARBET
AT WINGED WORLD

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

In any mixed collection of birds the tree-hole nesting species obviously
stand a far better chance of successfully incubating their eggs and rearing
their young than those which build exposed nests. This is particularly
so where the smaller hole drillers are concerned, as the entrance hole to
their nest cavity is small enough to provide a safe retreat from prospective
egg stealers. The successful breeding of the small Brown-throated Barbet
(Tricholaema melanocephalum stigmatothorax) provides ample proof of this
fact, whereas the nesting attempts of the other birds in their planted
compartment at the “ Winged World ” have been foiled by the continual
jockeying for the choicest sites and nesting material. These Barbets, and
the other arboreal nesting species prefer to drill their own holes into the
semi-rotten tree trunks provided for this purpose, and only when these are
unavailable do they resort to using nest boxes. Due to the nature of the
nest-hole, which had an entrance no more than one inch in diameter and
then appeared to drop vertically into the trunk, we were unable to ascertain
how many eggs were laid, or exactly how long the incubation period was,
although we consider it to have been about 12 days. Both sexes shared
the incubation duties, and mealworms, maggots and house crickets were
taken into the nest cavity. After eight days our prepared insectile and
minced beef mixture was taken in, and a little fruit, too. Only a single
nestling resulted from this breeding, and from a subsequent one also.
Both adult birds fed the nestling, which appeared at the entrance of the
nest hole approximately two weeks after hatching. They continued to
feed it for several weeks, but would not tolerate its presence when they
went to nest again.

As described above the Brown- throated Barbet ( Tricholaema melano¬
cephalum stigmatothorax ) has been bred at the Winged World. It is
believed this may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

146 CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE YELLOW-BREASTED FRUIT PIGEON

BREEDING THE YELLOW-BREASTED FRUIT
PIGEON AT THE WINGED WORLD

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

A pair of Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeons ( Ptilinopus occipitalis) have been
housed in the “ Winged World ” since we stocked the aviaries, three years
ago. They attempted to nest on several occasions when we kept them in
the free flight area, but were thwarted by the many Toucans, Jays and other
omnivorous species there. They were eventually settled into a large
planted compartment in company with numerous Bee-eaters, Pittas, Fairy
Bluebirds and other non-aggressive species and soon made use of the
flat-based plastic wire nest-basket which had been positioned at the
highest point on the rear wall. Fine hay was placed in this and was used
for nesting without the addition of any other material. Late in 1969 two
eggs, typically pigeon shape and colour, were laid in the nest, and were
incubated undisturbed by both birds for about 17 days, although the exact
incubation period was difficult to ascertain as they both sat tightly, and
changed over very quickly. When a chick was first seen in the nest it
appeared to be two or three days old. Neither were the parent birds seen
feeding the single chick which resulted from this first successful breeding,
although this has been observed during the further two successful
breedings which have occurred this year.

The other birds in the compartment were ignored by the adult pigeons
however close they ventured to the nest. On one occasion several
Carmine Bee-eaters were allowed to perch on the side of the nest con¬
taining the chick. When it eventually left the nest after 14 days and
moved to nearby branches, it was about half the size of the parents, and
had the same basic green colouration, but lacked their bright markings.
Six months later, these markings, particularly the deep yellow patch on
the breast, are beginning to show. The two subsequent breedings this
year have also produced one youngster each.

At the “ Winged World ” Fruit Pigeons are treated as omnivorous
birds, but we so often hear of instances of these birds receiving a diet of
fruit alone. A check on the content of the cultivated fruits that are
available to aviculturists will reveal that they are little more than expensive
water. Their protein content is practically nil, and most are either
devoid of, or very low in, vitamins and minerals. Our Fruit Pigeons
receive a typical omnivorous softbill diet, comprising diced fruit liberally
laced with vitamins and minerals and a good quality insectile mixture
with which is mixed equal parts of raw minced beef. Maggots and meal¬
worms are eaten with relish.

J. J. WALSH — BREEDING THE AFRICAN SONG SPARROW

H7

As described above the Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeon ( Ptilinopus
occipitalis ) has been bred at the Winged World. It is believed this may
be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

* * #

BREEDING THE AFRICAN SONG SPARROW
AND GREEN SINGING FINCH IN AUSTRALIA

By J. J. Walsh (Drouin, Victoria, Australia)

In 1968 I was offered a pair of African Song Sparrows ( Passer luted) ,
both young birds; and as I was told that they were hardy enough to
withstand the cold winter weather to which we are subjected in this
district, I was all too eager to try them. Both birds were still in their
juvenile plumage but moulted into adult plumage during the first winter.
The female stayed grey-brown with horn-coloured bill and legs, but the
male became quite different. Body, head and face became a pretty
lemon yellow, wings and tail brown, bill black, and legs horn-coloured.

During the month of September I noticed that the birds were objecting
to my presence in the aviary. The two chattered and complained every
time I approached to feed. This caused me to wonder what was wrong,
and on making a closer inspection of the sheltered section I found a large
untidy nest erected in some Tea-tree hung in the shelter. The huge nest
structure appeared to be camouflage for the small nest cavity in the centre
reserved for the eggs. After about three weeks two chicks fledged from
the nest, after loud chirping from the nest during the week which had
preceded their flight. Both proved to be females. In the 1969 season a
further five chicks fledged and are doing well.

African Green Singing Finches ( Serinus mozambicus ) also nested in the
last season, but the first two nests proved failures, the parents sitting for
ten days and then deserting the eggs. When the third clutch of three
white eggs were laid I placed them under a canary which kindly agreed
to take charge of them. All three chicks hatched and were reared by the
canaries and are now fully coloured and beautiful birds. The Green
Singers laid again and this time reared two chicks which fledged from the
nest but only lived one week owing to a cold snap. The aviary is
40 ft. x 18 ft. x 9 ft. high with f in. mouse-proof wire. It has permanent
water in the form of a pond, but this is only shallow. The aviary is fully
planted with mainly evergreen shrubs, affording great protection for all
the inhabitants.

148 J. MALLET — HAND -REARING AND KEEPING BABY SWALLOWS

HAND-REARING AND KEEPING BABY
SWALLOWS

By John Mallet (Jersey Zoo Park, Trinity, Jersey)

On nth July 1967 a young Swallow ( Hirundo rustica ), about ten days
old, was handed to me. I put it into a canary nest pan lined with cotton
wool, and put this into a budgerigar nest-box. Feeding it presented no
problem. It accepted bread and milk, hard-boiled egg and minced heart.
Four mealworms were given with each feed. The first feed was given
at 7 a.m. and then every three hours until dusk.

On 20th July it started sitting on the perch just below the hole of the
nest-box, frequently exercising its wings. If anything frightened it, it
flew back into the nest. By 22nd July it had learned to fly around the
kitchen, and would come and sit on my finger to be fed. During the
next two days I took it outside many times, but once it went off over the
buildings, out of sight. I called and in less than a minute it was back on
my finger. I gave it a few mealworms and it was off again and back on
my finger in a very short time.

This went on for two days; the flights gradually lengthening, and it
started to fly into the kitchen through a small open window only 9 in.
square. For about two weeks it flew in and out of the window during the
day. I hung a sack over the window each evening so that it was in for its
first feed in the morning. When on the wing it caught insects and also
went to one of the lakes for water, but still expected its mealworms when it
returned. On 26th August at 9.30 a.m. it went off and was not seen again.

Another young swallow was handed to me during the second week of
September 1968. This one had flown into a moving car and injured its
wing. It was fed the same diet as the first but I had to force feed it.
Because it was unable to fly I kept it in a box-type canary cage
18 in. x 12 in. x 15 in. with two natural perches and a dish of water. I also
put in a dish of mealworms. After a few days it was feeding itself on meal¬
worms so I put some Sluis Universal Food in with the mealworms and
stopped force feeding it. I offered it bread and milk in a separate con¬
tainer but this was not touched. It did eat some of the Sluis mixture.
When the injured wing was stronger it started to fly from perch to perch.
I decided to leave the cage door open and to fix some twiggy branches
around the room. Very soon the bird came out and flew around the
room using the perches to rest on. It did not find any difficulty getting
back to its cage for food. From then on the cage door was never shut.

The injured wing always stuck out slightly. I did not notice any
migratory urge in my swallow, but perhaps the injured wing accounted
for this. Since the wing was not strong enough for flight until late
November it was not possible to release it in the autumn. By 1st January
it was able to catch a few flies that it managed to find. The wild swallows

J. MALLET — HAND-REARING AND KEEPING BABY SWALLOWS

H9

arrived in April so I opened a window and three days later my swallow
had gone. I did not notice a swallow with a damaged wing among the
residents so I do not know how it fared.

# * #

BIRDS AT SEA

By Alan Booth — (M.V. Trecarrell , at sea)

During the present voyage I have tried to keep a record of birds which
came on board the ship, particularly after strong winds from the coast.
On the crossing from England to the Gulf States of America, we did
encounter such winds from the Bahamas. On the following morning
the following birds were on the ship : a small blackbird with white under¬
parts and orange-red wing and tail patches, this was later identified from
R. Tory-Peterson’s book, “ A Field Guide to Birds ”, as the American
Redstart. It was also accompanied by a female, both birds were very
tame as they even entered the accommodation in search of food. The
others, of which at least four were counted, were small, wren-sized,
olive green above, white abdomen, bright yellow breast, black mask
bordered posteriorly white, these were again identified from the above
book as Yellow- throated Warblers.

The two species were new to me and I had an opportunity to watch
them for at least four days before they left us at the Providence Channel,
in the early morning, as they were not seen again. During these four
days they were all seen looking for insects, and were seen to take very
small cues, which must have been blown out on the same winds, as well
as those already on the ship.

On entering the Gulf of Mexico we again had strong winds from the
north so we had more warblers and some herons. These were white,
small sized with yellow bill and black legs, which were identified as
American Egrets. Six were seen flying around the ship on the first day,
four flew off but two remained and stayed until the following day. They
were joined by a small, very dark heron with white abdomen, dark
greenish upper parts and purplish breast. This was identified as the
Louisiana Heron. They were all gone next day as we approached
Galveston. The other bird was an adult Mangrove Cuckoo which was
so tame we were able to approach within 2 ft. of it, before it moved away
down the wire hanging from the ship’s derrick, which were horizontal at
the time. He, too, had disappeared on approach to land.

The river, from Galveston to Houston, was the most profitable as the
following birds were seen with the aid of binoculars: Laughing Gulls,
White Pelicans, Roseate Spoonbill, Large White Heron, Large Blue
Heron, and Black-Crowned Night Heron. The Spoonbill, large blue,

ALAN BOOTH — BIRDS AT SEA

150

and Night Heron were all seen at the same colony. A few Skimmers
were seen to take fish from the river where they were feeding. In
Houston the Common Nighthawks were seen flying both at night and day;
as they were at all ports in this area we visited. The Boat-tailed Grackle
was seen in great numbers at the mouth of the Mississippi.

The birds seen on the way down from New York to New Orleans were
as follows : Cape May Warbler (male), Brown Thrasher, Cat Bird (male),
and a female Towhee. These were all identified with the help of the
Peterson book. Each only stayed for about a day since we were only just
off the coast.

Since this was only the beginning of the voyage, I am hoping more birds
will make their appearance on the ship during the remainder of it.

# * #

“ESCAPES”

By Derrick England (Neatishead, Norfolk, England)

At some time or other most aviculturists have inadvertently allowed a
bird to escape. Quite often it does not go very far and shows clearly
that it wants to re-enter the aviary, especially if it has a mate there.
Sometimes it may remain tantalizingly in the neighbourhood, every now
and then flying over the house, but never coming close enough to be
recaptured. For weeks and even months, neighbours telephone to say
that it is in their garden and “ do come and catch it ”, though more often
than not it has gone before the owner can arrive.

Some of these birds manage to find a living in the wild and to survive
for considerable periods; many, one suspects, meet a comparatively quick
death either because their period of captivity has blunted their awareness
of the danger from predators or because they cannot find sufficient food.
Even if suitable food exists, a bird which for years has fed from a dish or a
hopper may not be able to find enough to keep it alive when free.

Escape may occur in a number of ways, from the all-too-easy “ family
pet through the sitting-room window ” to the accidently open door of a
large aviary at a zoo. A very frequent source of curious birds in the
wild is the bird-keeper who, although he knows that his birds are not all
permanently pinioned, puts off the clipping of the wings of those which
are not until it is too late.

Most “ escapes ” are sufficiently unlike native British birds for it to be
obvious even to a casual observer that the bird which is visiting their
bird-table is something unusual, leading to a telephone call to a more
knowledgeable friend. Others attract less attention — even from ornitho¬
logists — either because they are natural “ skulkers ” or keep high in dense
foliage, or because, immediately they escape, they fly far away to the
nearest they can find to their natural habitat, woodland, broad open fields,
marsh-land or estuaries.

DERRICK ENGLAND — “ ESCAPES ”

151

It is unfortunately true to say that not all aviculturists are also field
ornithologists and, however much they deplore it when they do accidently
lose a bird, many are unaware of the confusion — and indeed sheer hard
work — which escapes may cause among those people who are responsible
for recording wild birds, and especially among those who are concerned
with the rare or unlikely visitors to this country.

A small body of ornithologists called the “ Rarities Committee ” was
set up some years ago by the Editors of the monthly journal British Birds
to consider each occurrence of a bird which is so rare that it has pre¬
viously been acceptably recorded only a very few times. One of the
chief objects was to achieve a uniformity of assessment of the evidence
submitted in each case, in a way which was not possible when records
were scrutinized only by local ornithologists. In the case of a bird
which would be completely new to the British list, this committee does not
publish the record until it has been considered and confirmed by a similar
committee of the British Ornithologists Union.

The writer of these notes has the task of scrutinizing all records sub¬
mitted and attending meetings of the Rarities Committee in order to
advise on the likelihood or otherwise of a recorded rarity having escaped
from captivity (ducks and geese excluded). Each year this becomes more
difficult as an ever-widening variety of species becomes available to
aviculturists; indeed, the stage is rapidly being reached where, given
the knowledge and the money, it will be possible to obtain in Britain all
but the remotest and little-known species. As an example of this, a
Snow Finch spent the best part of 12 months in and around an airfield in
East Anglia. Those who heard about it were so certain that it could not
possibly be a wild bird that no-one troubled to report it formally to the
Rarities Committee — the date of its arrival was wrong; its habitat was
wrong ; it was ridiculous to suppose that it had not escaped from captivity.
It was not until the writer pointed out that he knew of no Snow Finches
in captivity in this country and that they were most infrequently imported
that it was taken seriously.

A Scops Owl recently reported in the west country gives an example of
a different kind. The writer was aware that a very few are in captivity
in this country — chiefly in zoological gardens — and that, therefore, one
or two are occasionally imported. He admits that he would very much
like a pair of those beautiful little owls in his own collection and, even more,
a pair of Pygmy Owls. It is putting it very mildly, however, to say that
he was horrified to find, on enquiring about their availability (and thus
the corresponding likelihood of their escape) that one dealer alone was
importing Scops Owls (of various species) in crates of 20 and that, the
supply having temporarily run out, “ a hundred more are arriving next
Wednesday ”.

It is not within the terms of reference of this brief article to discuss
either the ethical or the conservation aspects of this state of affairs, and the

152

DERRICK ENGLAND — “ ESCAPES ”

writer would be the last to oppose the acquisition, by those people who
know how to look after them, of a very few Scops Owls each year. It is,
however, difficult to refrain from the comment that neither aviculturists
nor field ornithologists will have the pleasure of seeing Scops Owls at all
if this sort of thing is allowed to continue. Nor is it any consolation
to reflect that many die before loading on the plane in their country of
origin and that, of those which survive to reach a “ pet-shop ”, the
majority die a miserable death as a child’s pet, fed on bread and milk.
Quite certainly serious aviculturists in this country do not provide a
market for numbers such as these.

The main object of this brief paper, having drawn attention to the
increasing difficulties of deciding whether some birds are wild or have
escaped, is to enlist the help of all readers, whether they be curators of
zoological gardens or owners of a few pet birds. If they accidently lose
a bird which might be reported as being wild — ducks and geese excluded — ■
will they please immediately notify the writer at the address below. If
this address has been forgotten or mislaid the information would be
forwarded if addressed to the Editor of this journal or to the secretary of
the Avicultural Society, but the appropriate address should be used if
possible.

Members should be selective in their reporting, because a high pro¬
portion of birds kept in captivity can be ruled out. Thus parrots and
humming birds may obviously be excluded and a little imagination will
suggest a great many more. Care should, however, be exercised in the
case of birds which, although their country of origin is too far away for
them to have arrived “ unassisted ”, could be mistaken in the field for
birds on the British list. For example, Indian Rollers, many of which
are imported, could be confused with the European Roller and Bay-
backed Shrikes might at a brief glance be thought to be Lesser Grey
Shrikes. All thrush-like birds and “ little brown jobs ” should be
reported, the latter including female and out-of-colour weavers and
whydahs, and certainly all north American birds. Despite the fact that
few species of storks, cranes or flamingoes are likely to occur wild in
Britain, it would be helpful if all of them — and all pelicans — were reported
too, and, of course, all birds of prey from falconets to vultures. If there
is the slightest chance that an “ escapee ” could be thought to be a wild
bird, it is better to report than to be reticent — quite certainly no informa¬
tion will be ridiculed and all will be gratefully received.

It is perhaps relevant to conclude by saying that this “ information
bureau ” can work both ways — a number of escaped birds have been
retrieved by their owners as a result of information given to and received
from the Rarities Committee.

Please send information, including species, district and date, to
M. D. England, Mashobra, Neatishead, Norfolk, NOR 37Z. Phone:
Horning 561.

ROSEMARY LOW — THE MASSENA’S PARROT

153

THE MASSENA’S PARROT

By Rosemary Low (Sidcup, Kent, England)

The Massena’s Parrot, or White-capped Parrot ( Pionus seniloides) from
the central and eastern Andes of Colombia and the Andes of Ecuador, is
little known to aviculturists. I can only find one reference to this species
in confinement. Contained in the Avicultural Magazine for September
1933, Walter Goodfellow described how, while collecting in Quito,
Ecuador, he had in his possession two Massena’s or Grey-headed Parrots,
as he called them. They had the freedom of two or three rooms together
with a number of Bronze-wing, Blue-headed and Coral-billed Parrots,
Caiques, Amazons and conures. The Massena’s had been hand-reared
from the nest and used to sleep in a basket with a pair of Black-headed
Caiques. Goodfellow had a high regard for the members of the genus
Pionus as pets.

Unfortunately, the Duke of Bedford’s description of the Massena’s
Parrot would not inspire enthusiasm in anyone. He described it as
“ untidy looking ” with “ the appearance of a bird making a half-hearted
effort at albinism or suffering from weak feather growth.” The scientific
name “ seniloides ” meaning “ resembling the aged ” is equally uncompli¬
mentary and unjustified.

I was fortunate enough to obtain a young bird of this species in
December; it is, in my opinion, a most attractive little parrot and its
pretty markings are invariably commented on.

It has no bright colours except for the pinkish-red of the under tail
coverts and the area surrounding the vent. In common with most
members of the genus, the head colouring is rather complicated and
difficult to describe. The head feathers are a mixture of dark grey, pink
and pinkish or buffish-white, the centres of the feathers being a light
colour, edged usually with dark grey. The feathers of the ear coverts are
dark grey with pink centres, the small feathers at the side of the beak
having white centres. The forehead and crown feathers are a lighter
grey with pinkish centres and white bases and the large feathers of the
nape are pinkish white. The beak is pale yellow and the area of bare skin
surrounding the eye is white. The iris is brown. The upper breast is
dark vinous coloured with some of the feathers below the throat showing
salmon-coloured centres. The lower breast is a more pinkish vinous
colour. The wings, back, rump and the upper surface of the tail are a
uniform dark green. There is a pinkish-vinous patch at the base of the tail.
The length is 10 in.

On examination of a number of skins of this species, I found that the
markings were very variable; the underparts, for example, varied from
dark green with a vinous tinge to the upper breast only, to the whole of the

0

i54

ROSEMARY LOW — THE MASSENA’S PARROT

breast vinous-coloured. The depth of colour on the breast is probably
an indication of age, the immature birds being greener in this area.
Certainly, my own bird has developed more colour on the breast in the
five months it has been in my possession.

Soon after I bought it, it began to take grapes from my fingers and to
nibble playfully at my hand. After about two months, I opened the cage
door, but the open doorway was ignored until I placed a twig across it.
This was immediately investigated and the Massena’s was soon outside,
climbing around the top of the cage. Some time was spent sitting there
before it suddenly took wing and circled the room two or three times,
flying with much confidence. After landing on the picture rail several
times, it dropped almost vertically on to the cage and was soon back
inside. The flight of this species is strong and direct; it is also able to
hover.

This little parrot is absolutely ideal as a pet — it is intelligent, inquisitive
and full of mischief. It delights in exploring different parts of the room
and has never done any damage. This is just one aspect of the superiority,
in my opinion, of this genus as pets, over Amazon Parrots. They are
nowhere near as noisy as Amazons and except for a five minute session of
shrieking every day, inspired by my Amazon and carried out in com¬
petition, the Massena’s is not noisy. The greatest disadvantage of
Amazons as pets is seldom mentioned: when adult and really fit their
tempers can seldom be trusted; when in breeding condition they are,
unfortunately, often dangerous and certainly not suitable as pets for
children or for anyone who is nervous of a parrot’s beak. Pionus are very
gentle — they may nip playfully but seldom cause real harm. I doubt
whether they would learn to speak more than a few words and have not
the ability to whistle like Amazons but talking parrots have little attraction
for me.

My Massena’s is very fond of fruit and greenfood and, apart from spray
millet, which is consumed with relish, shows little interest in sunflower,
loose millet or canary seed. Any fruit or greenfood is eaten including
grapes, apple, orange, tangerine, cabbage, spinach, dandelion leaves,
seeding grasses and chickweed. When soft fruit is in season, especially
cherries, I have no doubt that it will be eagerly eaten.

I feel sure that the bird will become very tame — it has flown on to my
shoulder several times and comes to me to have its head rubbed as soon
as it sees the twig which I use to scratch its head.

Avicult. Mag.

Copyright ] [Rosemary Low

Massena’s Parrot

Avicult. Mag,

Copyright ]

[Australian Imformation Services

Black Cockatoo

H. FRAUCA — AUSTRALIAN PARROTS : PROBLEMS AND STUDIES

155

AUSTRALIAN PARROTS: PROBLEMS AND
STUDIES

By Harry Frauca (Australia)

Australian parrots present a fascinating challenge to the conserva¬
tionist and the scientist.

With 53 species listed for continental Australia and some neighbouring
islands, they form one of the most varied and numerous groups of the
order Psittaciformes in the world. Aesthetically, they are amongst the
most beautiful birds anywhere on earth; some of them have evolved a
coloration which is so exquisite as to defy description.

While some species appear to have decreased partly as a result of
European settlement, othes have benefited and their numbers and their
range extended greatly. Parrots are as much a part of the Australian bush
scene as the gum trees and the kangaroos. One can hardly travel any¬
where in this continent and in some islands, without encountering parrots
of some species. And in certain areas, one may actually see clouds of
these birds aloft. Recently, a Western Australian naturalist watched
flocks of Budgerigars which he estimated to number some 20,000 birds.
And I have often seen the sun-parched trees covered with little corellas,
completely white birds so that it looked as though a snowfall had just
blanketed the trees.

But the parrot situation in Australia has many facets. As I write this,
one of the most common of our parrots, the Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, is
protected in some states, but not protected in others. It is not protected,
for instance, in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria and in my
Queensland country town an adult bird of this species sells for $Aio,
a young one for $A20. This explains the popularity of these birds even
in their homeland. The Sulphur-crested Cockatoo or White Cockatoo
is one of our finest “ talkers ” and hence a much coveted pet.

Budgerigars sell for $Ai a pair, but other rarer species such as the
turquoise parrot sells for $Aio a pair. Exportation of parrots is forbidden
but there is a lively — and quite legal — trade in these birds throughout
Australia. Many Australians living in bush towns make considerable
sums of money from trapping and selling parrots. A friend of mine who
is a full-time fireman supplements his income with parrot trapping and
receives regular orders for consignments of 100 or 200 birds at a time.

Trapping involves little expense but much patience and bush work.
Usually, box traps are set in areas where parrots feed. “ Callers ” (aviary
birds) are placed in the traps and these decoy the wild parrot to the traps.
In a good day a trapper can catch 30 or 40 parrots.

The popularity of some species is, however, badly offset by the unpopu¬
larity of others. For instance, the galah, one of the better known
Australian parrots, was declared a pest in certain Western Australian

1 56 H. FRAUCA — AUSTRALIAN PARROTS: PROBLEMS AND STUDIES

districts after flocks of this bird played havoc in wheat fields causing
serious losses to the growers. Similar stories come from other parts of
Australia.

Certain rosellas, among which are some of the most beautiful species in
this country, are also most unpopular. A farmer friend of mine and his
two sons shot 235 Pale-headed Rosellas over a week as the birds pounced
on the milo fields. Naturally, this species is not protected in Queensland.

By their status of abundance, Australian parrots fall into these cate¬
gories: abundant, common, rare and very rare. Among the most
abundant throughout a large section of eastern Australia, are some
lorikeets such as the Rainbow Lorikeet, the Musk Lorikeet, the Scaley-
breasted and the Little Lorikeet.

The Rainbow Lorikeet is one of the most colourful species and, like
the other lorikeets, a vociferous bird which makes its presence felt by
strident calls. Lorikeets feed largely on blossoms or on the nectar therein
and the rainbow is no exception. A nomadic bird that travels in small
flocks, it follows the blossoming gums and tea-tree (Melaleuca) and dozens
of these birds can be heard and seen feeding on the blossom of these trees
in many bush areas.

The feeding habits of our parrots are variable; most cockatoos feed on
grain, seeds, and some take insects and their larvae. One of these, the
glossy Black Cockatoo has rather specialized feeding habits. A glossy
black bird with a rather funereal appearance, it occurs sparsely in mountain
forests of eastern Australia usually in areas where Sheoaks or Casuarina
trees are plentiful. Much of its food derives from these trees. It will
eat mainly the seeds contained in the cones. I have often watched some
eating; an interesting sight.

The bird bites the woody cone off the tree limb, then transfers the cone
to one claw. Grasping the cone firmly, it proceeds to tear off the husk to
expose the seeds which it then eats. While doing so, this cockatoo shows
the efficacy of the foot structure as a “ hand ” for the manipulation of
objects.

The Black Cockatoo is also another specialized feeder. In addition
to eating seeds, blossoms, nectar, fruits, nuts and berries, this large
beautiful species will also seek and eat the larvae of certain insects that are
tree borers.

Landing on a tree, it proceeds to bite off pieces of bark until it reaches
the tunnel underneath in which is the insect grub or larva. The bird seems
to seek particularly the large grubs of some wood moths, Cossidae, and
of some large longicorn beetles, Cerambycidae, known among Australians
as “ wichetty grubs ”. However, many of us would like to know how the
black cockatoo manages to track down the trees where the larvae are, or
perhaps it happens on to the right tree by accident.

History tells us that the first Australian parrot described by Europeans
was probably the Little Corella which was mentioned by the English

H. FRAUCA — AUSTRALIAN PARROTS: PROBLEMS AND STUDIES

157

adventurer, William Dampier, in his journals dating back to 22nd August
1699. He saw these white birds on islands of now the Dampier Archi¬
pelago in north-western Australia.

The Little Corella is one of the most abundant species. Recently, an
observer in north-western Australia watched flocks which he estimated
to number between 60 to 70,000 birds. An interesting point about this
species is that it often mates with the Galah. Galah-Corella hybrids are
trapped in the wild from time to time and they are also known to be
produced in aviaries. The genetic combinations of these two species
produce a bird that is usually like the Galah, complete with the Galah’s
grey, pink-rose plumage, but it has the characteristic bluish-purplish eye
ring of the Corella.

Most Australian parrots breed in hollow trees or similar spots and the
hens produce white eggs. There is one parrot, however, that appears to
make a nest in the tree hollow, a habit that is not known for other Australian
species. This is the turquoise parrot, a splendid bird that is no longer
abundant, and which occurs in eastern Australia. One bird was seen
recently stripping green leaves from a tree, placing them under the rump
feathers and carrying them to the nesting site.

Another specialized nester is the Rock Parrot of the coastal regions of
southern and western Australia which is known to lay the eggs in rock
crevices; and the Ground Parrot, a relatively rare species which occurs in
grasslands of Tasmania and eastern Australia, which makes a shallow
scrape in the ground under grass cover and there lays her eggs.

The two rarest parrots in Australia are the Paradise Parrot and the Night
Parrot. The Paradise Parrot occurred near my home in the Burnett-
Mary river valleys of Queensland and in north-east New South Wales.
The last and only photograph of this bird was taken in 1922 by naturalist
C. H. Jerrard only a few miles from my home and shows the parrot
standing at the foot of a termite mound.

The bird’s association with termite mounds concerns nesting sites.
That is, the Paradise Parrot breeds in hollows excavated into termite
mounds where the eggs are laid. The bird was recorded in areas of
savannah or scrubby grasslands with plenty of termite mounds. Although
many expeditions in search of this bird have been carried out, none has
met with success. The last record of this species dates back to 1926
when a party of five was seen near Casino, N.S.W.

But for all that many of my colleagues and I don’t believe that the
Paradise Parrot is extinct. This country is too big and too little known
to come to rash conclusions on “ extinct species.”

A similar rare species is the Night Parrot which has only been recorded
in the inland regions. It is a nocturnal bird, probably chiefly or entirely
a ground feeder and ground dweller. The only specimen positively
identified in this century was obtained in 1937 in the inland. All expedi¬
tions in search of this bird have failed but perhaps being a noctural bird
and of highly cryptic habits, it is hard to discover.

158 H. FRAUCA — AUSTRALIAN PARROTS: PROBLEMS AND STUDIES

But the future of most of our parrots seems to be bright enough. Most
species are protected in some parts of their range, others are protected
throughout the country. Many or all species are bred in aviaries so
ensuring a steady supply of new individuals for, fortunately, most species
breed well in captivity providing that the right quarters and food are
supplied.

And the famous “ budgie ” which is now acclimatized as a cage pet in
many countries, is still as plentiful as it ever was and still clouds of these
beautiful little birds soar aloft in the bush sky proclaiming the hardiness
of this species, which has become adapted to live and survive in some
of the toughest environments on earth.

* * *

BREEDING ROBINS

By Frank Meaden (Cheshunt, Hertfordshire, England)

In the Magazine last year C. J. O. Harrison (Harrison, 1969 a , b )
described an attempt to breed robins Erithacus rubecula , which was
thwarted by the aggressiveness of the male parent which killed the young.
When the opportunity arose this year it seemed worthwhile to try it again
under different circumstances, and to compare the results.

The parents in this instance were hand-reared birds from separate nests
which had come to grief in the wild the previous year. They were
presumably unrelated, and were housed in adjoining aviaries in the garden
from the time in 1969 when they became self-supporting to the 1970 breed¬
ing season. Each of the aviaries measured some 12 x 6 x 6J ft. high, and
were partly sheltered and covered at the back. They contained a natural
growth of rhododendron, redcurrant, reeds, iris, sedge, blackberry and
honeysuckle, which rather gives the impression of densely overgrown
aviaries ; but this was not so for the vegetation was fairly low and confined
to the perimeter of the aviary. The front of the aviaries was partly
sheltered by an apple tree; and at the front, which butts on the garden
path, a hollow log was fixed about four feet up in the female’s aviary.
This was placed horizontally with the entrance hole facing east.

The normal daily food consisted of Avi-vite softbill food and finely
grated cheddar cheese, and a ration of maggots powdered with Casilan,
together with whatever else they could find in their enclosures.

Towards the end of March the hen was seen to be frequenting the nest-
log on numerous occasions throughout the day, but only remaining
inside for a few moments during each visit. At this period a pair of wild
robins were seen in the garden. These were believed to be nesting
somewhere in the near vicinity. Constant fighting took place between
the two males, our own bird challenging the wild bird upon each visit.

F. MEADEN : BREEDING ROBINS

159

The challenge would be readily accepted and they would attack each
other while hovering and fluttering vertically up and down the full height
of the enclosure with just the wire between them.

Believing the 1st of April to be as good a day as any, the male was, on
this day, placed in the female’s enclosure. They were watched, but no
squabbling was observed between them, merely the usual tail-flicking
and an occasional chase with the male stopping a few inches short of the
hen with a little bow and tail flip. By the 5th April a nest had been
commenced, intervals between entering the nest-hole were now far
shorter, and each time a billfull of nesting material, such as dead leaves
or fine grass, was taken into the log. All nest building appeared to be
by the hen at this stage, the male going no further than a quick settling
on the threshold, a peep into the log, and back to his favourite singing
perch.

The hen was sitting tight on five eggs by the 10th April, with the male
singing almost from dawn to dusk in the farthest corner of their enclosure,
only visiting the feeding shelf sited near the nest-log on rare occasions,
and even then taking hardly any food. On 26th April when ASPEBA
held a meeting at our house members were able to observe the newly
deposited broken eggshells which were dropped in a further corner of the
aviary. It was at this time that the male commenced taking food to the
hen. He was in the log for so short a time, hardly disappearing before
re-emerging with the bill empty, that he had too little time to feed the
young.

European Flour-moth larvae in varying stages of growth were now
included in the food, and a bucket of rotting fruit in their enclosure also
attracted a certain amount of insect life, and since part of the enclosure
covered a portion of the garden goldfish pond there may well have been
other insect life taken but not recorded. With the knowledge that young
now existed, we added Calcium Lactate as well to the maggots in an effort
to obviate any deficiency and possible rickets, adding about five drops of
Abidec to the maggots first, so giving them a slight film of the concentrated
vitamin before adding this powder and the Casilan.

Once the crucial five-day stage was passed a daily ration of 20 or so
mealworms were included in the diet. Unlike many other softbills the
robins took most of these to the nest and did not eat them themselves,
although they may have taken just a few. On the 10th May, when four
other aviculturists were present, we slid aside the plastic flap which
covered an observation hole in the log, and found the presence of four
almost fully feathered nestlings. The wild robin was still visiting the
aviary.

The young emerged from the nest on 12th May, leaving one unhatched
egg. On 15th May one fully feathered but partly decomposed youngster
was removed from the pond. On 17th May the hen was observed to be
nesting again in the same site, the unhatched egg having disappeared and

i6o

f. meaden: breeding robins

an almost new nest was completed. No further checks were made on
the new nest but the hen seemed reluctant to begin laying again, and
since the three young were present I wondered if their presence in the
nest area had inhibited the production of a second clutch.

The male wild robin which had continued to visit the garden ceased to
do so after the 18th May The male of the aviary pair appeared to ignore
his offspring once they were feeding themselves and the hen showed
increasing interest in the nest. On the 29th May, when by subsequent
calculation the clutch must have been laid and incubation begun, and
when the young were 17 days out of the nest, the male suddenly turned
on the young ones. Within half an hour of an earlier check he had killed
one young bird, stripping the top of the head and pecking out the eyes,
and a second young one was being attacked. The remaining young were
caught up and removed. The second young one had been pecked about
the head and eyes, but no serious damage was visible and after it had
been treated with an eyewash, and force-fed with five mealworms, it was
back to normal behaviour within minutes, apparently sustaining no shock.

The 10th June saw eggshells once again carried from the nest and on
14th June E. Easter investigated the nest and found that three or four
young had hatched. At the time of writing they are doing well and will
be left with the parents in the enclosure to see if any set pattern is shown
by the male in his reaction to the young.

This method of breeding this species has had greater success than that
described by C. J. O. Harrison. Factors which might have assisted success
are the introduction of the male to the female’s aviary, which might reduce
his initial dominance; and, more important still, the fact that for the
greater part of the nesting cycle a wild male was present and enabled the
aviary male to direct the greater part of his aggressive reaction towards
this outside individual.

Man creates many problems when confining birds and animals in
confined spaces. These should all breed under suitable conditions but
the many barriers that we ourselves erect have to be overcome. When
one listens to some bird breeders one could be excused for believing that
they might have brooded and reared the clutch themselves; but in actual
fact we do very little apart from reducing the difficulties that we have
created for ourselves in the first place.

REFERENCES

Harrison, C. J. O., 1969 a. The killing of nestlings by the male parent.

Avicult. Mag. 75, 121-132*

Harrison, C. J. O., 1969 b. Partial success with breeding the Robin. Avicult .

Mag., 75, 168-173.

M. FLIEG — BREEDING THE YELLOW- WATTLED BRUSH-TURKEY l6l

BREEDING THE YELLOW- WATTLED BRUSH
TURKEY IN NORTH AMERICA

By G. Michael Flieg (Brookfield, Illinois, U.S.A.)

Megapodes are a family of game birds restricted to Malaysia, the South¬
west Pacific, the Philippines, New Guinea and Australia. The family is
unique in that it constitutes a group of birds which leave the incubation
of their eggs to a natural heat source — solar heat, volcanic heat or the heat
produced by decaying vegetation. Megapod means “ big foot ” and is
quite appropriate for the io species which rely on their feet for excavation.
Although many have been kept periodically, only the Yellow Wattled
Talegallus or Brush Turkey ( Alectura lathami) of Eastern Australia has
bred freely in Europe but until this year none were bred in the Western
Hemisphere. In 1969 the first breeding was accomplished at St. Louis
followed later by San Diego.

In late July 1968, the St. Louis Zoo obtained two pairs of 1967 hatch
birds captive bred in Frankfurt, Germany. They were placed in a large
outdoor exhibit approximately 30 ft. x 20 ft. The birds had access to a
barn and they were always fed inside — their diet consisted of Purina
Game Bird F & M in the fall. In winter, 50% of the above, 25% Trout
Chow No. 4, and 25% small seed. As a breeder ration in the spring and
summer 50% Trout Chow and 50% Game Bird F & M.

Although they had free choice access to the barn — they entered only
to feed or to escape the badgering of the dominant male, although the
outside temperature reached extremes of io° F. Peat moss was supplied
to the birds from the beginning. It was piled into a corner of the enclo¬
sure, but was immediately moved away from these obstacles by the male
and a mound took form. No further material was supplied until breeding
behaviour was noted in the summer. It was at this period when the sub¬
dominant male had to be removed as the colour of the head and wattles of
the dominant bird intensified as he came into breeding condition. He
simply would not let the other male alone and pursued him constantly.
The male alone took care of the mound and he would not tolerate the
presence of the hens on the mound, except for brief intervals. It was also
at this time that all loose material went into the pile. Although we added
more peat moss — feathers, droppings, debris from the yard and shavings
from the barn were incorporated into the mound. The mound finally
grew to 15 ft. in diameter and 3J ft. high. It was at this time that we
decided that the mound wasn’t decomposing quickly enough to produce
heat and three bushels of Bison dung were added to the core. Heat was
produced almost immediately and the decomposition of the other organic
material began. The male must keep a relatively constant temperature in
the mound. His thermometer is his wattles or tongue, therefore, he must
open the mound in the morning to let it cool off; as the sun warms the
mound it is covered over to prevent excess heat from entering, but if it is a

1 62 M. FLIEG - BREEDING THE YELLOW- WATTLED BRUSH-TURKEY

cool day it is left open. At evening it is shovelled back together again to
seal the heat in. This process also allows for any new collected materials
to be fully incorporated into the mound. To the casual observer it
appears as if he is tearing it apart and putting it back together. Although
the Brush Turkey is considered monogamous, the presence of two hens
had no effect and the trio lived in harmony, but I suspect from the total
number of eggs that only one hen laid.

The hens’ feathers were broken and frazzled indicating that the male
either persecuted or copulated with them. Copulation was not witnessed,
but I rather believe that it occurred in the early morning as the male
worked all day on the mound. Although we searched religiously for
eggs, we did not find any until 15th August when a clutch of 14 were
found buried about 2 ft. below the surface, standing vertically on end and
were spaced roughly 6 in. apart Some eggs were found in a layer beneath
the others. The earliest eggs were closest to the centre as ascertained
by candling. They were laid in roughly a 30° wedge of the circum¬
ference of the mound. The interval between eggs in the species is
approximately 5-7 days (Lack 1968) indicating the first egg may have
been laid in late June. The incubation period is variable depending upon
the heat of the mound, but is recorded at normally 47-52 days (Baltin and
Faust 1965). This, of course, depends upon the actual heat of the mound.
The eggs are very large in relation to other birds eggs, the egg weight being
approximately 12% that of the hen. Of course, the birds hatch at a
highly advanced stage in comparison to other birds. Upon candling the
eggs, five were removed and placed into a still air incubator at 93 0 F.
This temperature was selected after reading an account published by the
Frankfurt Zoo (Baltin and Faust 1965).

The eggs were placed upright and covered with damp peat moss. The
eggs are never turned in the mound when tended by the male and the
unique egg, about the size of that of a Canada Goose, contains a moveable
air bubble. The first egg was a heartbreak as the chick broke the paper
thin shell, but couldn’t break the damp membrane and died. The second
hatched on 17th August and was placed into a game bird hatcher to dry —
I believe the 99 \° F. was too hot for it and it died after six hours. I believe
that this is the first megapode to be hatched in a mechanical incubator
although Frankfurt hatched birds in an aquarium with decaying leaves.
It was interesting to note that the position of the chick within the egg as
they have no egg tooth and simply use their feet to kick out of the egg,
therefore, they are upside down in relation to other birds. After hatching
in the mound the chick must dig his way to the surface which takes
24-30 hours. Artificially hatched chicks at Frankfurt as well as the St.
Louis chicks were unable to right themselves until about 24 hours old,
probably because they lie on their backs and kick to excavate out.

The first chick hatched from the mound appeared in the yard on 21st
August. It was removed immediately and placed in a wire commercial

M. FLIEG BREEDING THE YELLOW- WATTLED BRUSH-TURKEY 1 63

brooder with no heat. When a junglefowl chick was placed with the
megapode chick, the latter became quite passive and did not appear
comfortable. This was received as an indication that the chick did not
feel at ease with a companion as he normally would take care of himself
after hatching and lead a rather solitary existence. We removed the
junglefowl and the Brush Turkey became very active, feeding on f Game
Purina Bird F & M and J Purina Trout Chow with LIV sprinkled on
top. Twice daily some crickets were offered and received with relish.

When hatched megapode chicks have fully developed remiges and
are capable of flight; they are covered with grey coloured down with an
orange tint on the head and neck. They are larger than peafowl at
hatching. After the young hatch, the parents have no further contact
with them although they apparently do not harm them. A statement that
the cock digs the chicks into the pile for a few nights is unconfirmed, but
chicks can dig themselves out again after leaving the pile if they are
reburied. According to Frankfurt data, after hatching, chicks lose
35% of their egg weight, and 40% when they reach the top of the pile.
After 3-4 weeks the other feathers grow and the weight triples — after
four months the birds reach 60% of their weight and are full grown within
a year.

By December 1969 the St. Louis bird was about 3 \ months old and was
about 85% grown. This breeding was accomplished while I was Curator
of Birds, St. Louis Zoological Gardens.

REFERENCES

Lack, D. 1968. Ecological Adaptations for Breeding Birds, p. 200, 201.

Baltin, S., and Faust, 1965. Beobachtungen uber die Entwicklung von
Alectura lathami (Talegalla-Huhn) bei naturlich und Kunstlich bebruteten
Eiern (Megapodiden, GroBfuBhuhner). Zeitschrift die Naturwissen-
schaften, 52(g), 218, 219.

# # *

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

Dinners and Meetings during the 1970-71 session have been arranged
for the following dates:

The 1970-71 Session
Friday, 4th September, 1970
Friday, 20th November, 1970
Friday, 12th March, 1971

The Dinners will be held at the Windsor Hotel, Lancaster Gate,
London, W.2.

Arthur A. Prestwich,

Hon. Secretary.

164

NEWS AND VIEWS

NEWS AND VIEWS

John Bunker: “ My pair of Ornate Lorikeets ( Trichoglossus ornatus)
are breeding and at the moment (26th May) seem to be rearing their two
young successfully.”

* * #

Pesquet or Pecquet. Lesson in 1831 named this parrot Psittacus
Pecquetii , the account stating that he had received the specimen from
M. Pecquet. Later in the same year he spelled the name Psittacus
Pesquetii. We are, therefore, left wondering which is really the correct
spelling. Pesquet is now generally accepted, although Pecquet, possibly
incorrect, does, of course, have priority.

*7v* *7V* *7v*

Why Quelea? C. J. Skead, Bokmakierie , March, 1970, 3, asks this very
pertinent question.

In 1758 Carl Linnaeus named the Red-billed Weaver Emberiza quelea.
It is generally supposed that quelea has its origin in some African language.
But when would, or could, Linnaeus have got the name? Perhaps one of
our more erudite members can elucidate.

Phillip Glasier, The Falconry Centre, writes (18th May): “ We have
had 10 clutches from nine different species so far this year. At the moment
on eggs we have Lanners, Red-tailed Buzzards, Common Buzzards,
Kestrels (we reared six last year), American Kestrels, Tawny Owls, Bay
Owls and Merlins. Our Caracaras laid eggs but though fertile they failed
to hatch.”

# # #

Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel, Lembeek, Belgium (5th May): “The second
nest of the Bronze-winged Parrots ( Pionus chalcopterus) was also infertile.
We were very unlucky with the three eggs of Ringnecks, by the parents
of the albino. They were entrusted to a normal hen who left them 'while
hatching. None of the chicks was red-eyed.

“ We have a few Mulgas and Blue Bonnets, and we hope to raise a

few Green Rosellas, as well as dilute Golden-mantled.”

# # *

An item from Peterborough’s column, Daily Telegraph , 19th May
1970: “ Thrush a la carte. How Italian ideas on sport differ from ours
was apparent yesterday at a show of products from Pisa and Lucca at
the Italian Trade Centre in Mayfair. On show was a clockwork gadget
(a battery-operated version also is available) that imitates the calls of
blackbirds and thrushes. One of a number of bird-ensnaring devices,
it is said to work like magic, pulling in the victims as fast as they can be
shot and skewered for roasting.”

NEWS AND VIEWS

165

Down the years exhibitors have done very well with Choughs. The
same cannot be said of aviculturists. The difficulty being, I imagine,
that aviculturists have only very occasionally been able to obtain pairs.
I am reminded of this by the fact that Choughs at the Riber Castle Fauna
Reserve and Wildlife Park have recently produced five eggs. I do not
think anyone has been completely successful in rearing this species,
although Claude Payne came near to success in 1967, when one young

one lived a fortnight or so.

# * *

Arthur and Catherine Tyler, Oakland, New Jersey, state that experience
has shown them that Jendaya Conures will, if allowed, breed approxi¬
mately every four months. They write: “ We let them have three
clutches, three eggs on each occasion. The first produced two young,
the second three and the third but one, although all the eggs were fertile.
The last was hand-fed from a few weeks old and so we have a very tame,
sweet pet bird. Jendayas do, however, have a very lusty voice which

some people might find unbearable.”

^ ^ ^

George and Bessie Bray, San Francisco : “ Last year we had two unusual
breedings. An African Silverbill crossed with a female Bengalese
(Society) Finch. There was only one young one, a male that looks like an
overgrown African Silverbill, but with a darker beak and darker facial area.
Fie in turn mated with an African Silverbill, but as far as we can tell
without result. Maybe he is a mule! We also had a Green Singing
Finch cross with a Yellow-rumped Grey Singing Finch hen. Two

beautiful young ones which turned out quite rufous in colour.”

# # #

It is reported in Oryx , May, 1970, 243, that Dr. Rodolfo E. Gonzales
is of the opinion that the total population of the Monkey-eating Eagle of
Mindanao Island, Philippines (the Eagles only home) is now only about
36 birds, certainly less than 50.

It is perhaps worth recalling that this Eagle {Pithecophaga jefferi) was
named for a near relative of a former Vice-President of the Society,
the late Edward Boosey. The type-specimen was obtained by John
Whitehead during his successful expedition to the Philippines, 1894-97.
At the collector’s request it was named after his father, Jeffery Whitehead,

grandfather to Edward Boosey.

# # *

Dr. Maurice Burton, Daily Telegraph , 7th March 1970, says it is very
difficult to understand the way birds seem to enjoy smoke. He writes:
“ Before electrification, the steam train on Ryde pier, belching smoke,
always had its attendant flock of gulls that accompanied it the length of
the pier. Starlings, jackdaws and rooks are fond of perching on smoking
chimney stacks, whether of private houses or factories, or did before oil¬
burning became so general.

NEWS AND VIEWS

1 66

“ The worst addict recorded in my file was perhaps the hill mynah
that flew at anyone smoking a cigarette, nipped off the glowing end and
swallowed it.”

* * #

1969 was a very good year for Gentoo Penguins at the Edinburgh Zoo;
18 young were reared from 24 eggs hatched; on the other hand only one
King was successfully reared

One of the most interesting events was the rearing to maturity of three
young from four eggs hatched by the pair of American Kestrels Falco
sparverius).

The Cassowaries have laid eggs annually since 1965; on four occasions
eggs have been hatched. Last year three eggs were laid; one proved
infertile but the other two produced healthy chicks. One young one
unaccountably disappeared, so only one was reared. This makes a total
of five reared during the last three years.

# * *

Mrs. K. M. Scamell (28th May): “Our Quaker Babblers Alcippe
horocephala have hatched two young, probably two days ago. I cannot
trace that this species has been bred before. The late spring has resulted
in late nesting everywhere, except the hen Cock-of-the-Rock Rupicola
peruviana sanguinolenta , which started building last February and laid an
egg about a week ago. She incubated about a week and then either she
or the male knocked it out of the nest.

“ Lemon- rumped Tanagers Ramphocelus icteronotus and Rothschild’s
Mynas are incubating two and three eggs respectively, and the Indian
Blue Chats have one egg. Other softbills are building, so it is rather early
to say whether it is going to be a good season or not.”

# * *

Mrs. Leila Leitch: “ This year I have been very successful with Pygmy
Cardinals Lophospingus pusillus and have reared five, one by hand. The
Zosterops are incubating eggs for the fifth time. On the first three
occasions the cock destroyed the eggs after a few days. At the fourth
sitting five young ones were hatched and both parents fed the chicks at
frequent intervals with fruit flies, bread and milk, honey-sponge and
finally chopped mealworms. This parental care and enthusiasm con¬
tinued for four days, but on the fifth morning I found all the young had
been tossed from the nest. The hen appeared somewhat distressed for a
short while that day but soon recovered, and within a week was relining
the same nest and is at present (nth May) incubating four eggs which
are due to hatch this weekend. Both are taking turns in incubating the
eggs. We shall keep the birds under close observation and may remove
the male when the eggs are hatched.”

NEWS AND VIEWS

167

G. A. Smith writes: “ Two or three years ago a small consignment of
Malayan Long-tailed Parrakeets Psittacula longicauda were imported,
and a few more last year. As with all the ‘ Psittaculines * cock birds
seem to have preponderated. My own ‘ hen ’ moulted out to become such
another. This young bird I exchanged for the only hen — despite my
advertisements — I could muster. And then she, on receipt, seemed
strongly to favour one foot — always standing on the other. Needless to
add this resolved itself to be severe frost bite. They seem to be just as
hardy as other members of their genus: Bedford found them otherwise.
When frightened, and they are most suspiciously nervous birds, they sleek
their feathers very close to the body. Consequently, the otherwise
unnoticed (because such movements take place under cover of the
feathers) abdominal respiratory movements become most pronounced.
And if particularly scared the increased respiratory rate then becomes
audible and may, to the uninitiated, seem ‘ pneumonic ’. I had hoped
to try to get them to breed. Unfortunately, they are supposed to nest in
January or February in the wild. At present the cock is in a profound
moult.

“ At the moment (28th April) I have New Zealands on eggs, and three
other pairs, I hope, thinking about it. My Many-colours have only laid
three eggs, one of which is infertile. So Fve fostered them off with
Redrumps and hope that they will have a more ‘ generous ’ forced second
round. Lutino Cockatiels, all four pairs, have eggs. If only, in bird
breeding, one could count chicks before they hatch! ”

A. A. P.

# # #

REVIEW

A GUIDE TO PHEASANTS OF THE WORLD. By Philip Wayre.

London: The Hamlyn Group, 1970. Price 635.

This is an up-to-date account of our present knowledge of these
beautiful and interesting birds written by the Honorary Director of the
Pheasant Trust in Norfolk, where the most comprehensive collection of
pheasants in the world is being maintained. The so-called progress of
civilization resulting in the destruction of tropical and sub-tropical forest
has brought extinction, or the threat of it, to many of these birds and at
the present time of the 48 species of pheasants at least 16 are considered
to be in danger of disappearing from the world. Fortunately the Pheasant
Trust, at Great Witchingham near Norwich, has been successful in
breeding many of these species and recently has re-introduced a number
of Swinhoe’s Pheasants into Taiwan where the species is close to extinction.
A similar project is in hand with regard to the Mikado Pheasant.

Details are given of housing and management of breeding birds and
there are chapters on incubation and rearing and a useful account of the

REVIEW

1 68

diseases of pheasants. The genera are then described in detail illus¬
trated with a series of excellent coloured plates, and a detailed check list
of pheasants of the world.

The three appendices deal respectively with the work of the Pheasant
Trust, the Eley Game Advisory Service and the Game Research Associa¬
tion.

Aviculturists will find this book a most useful guide and source of

information. E. H.

# * #

NOTES

NOTES ON PARAKEETS AND SEEDEATERS

Last autumn, owing to the impossibility of obtaining labour to help with the
glasshouses I had to cut down considerably on my collection of birds. In parakeets
my interest in the main has now been concentrated on my favourites, the Kings, and
Princess of Wales. Both species have confounded all my expectations, because of
the spartan diet to which I was forced to subject them during last winter and
spring, by producing large broods. In the past I have been able to practice what
I consider good animal husbandry by giving all sorts of foods, and supplements,
to bring them into breeding condition. This year they had a bare dry seed diet
from November to April. Nest-boxes were only put in the flight in the second
week of May, at which time I also put in large quantities of chickweed. The
breeding results were the best ever.

The seedeaters in my planted aviaries have brought pleasure and sorrow. The
Red-faced Crimson-wing Cryptospiza reichenowi, of which I wintered two males
and a female in an unheated aviary, early in May (to my great surprise as I had
no idea young were in the nest) had three young fly when A. V. Griffiths, who was
down on holiday, put his finger in the nest. One young one, a male, is still very
much alive but the other two died. Also, I am sorry to say, the only hen, the
mother, was also lost. She and one of her young were picked up from the aviary
floor badly mutilated about the head, by, I suspect, a Magpie which later took
all of a brood of Blackbirds which had nested in the honeysuckle which covers
these aviaries. These Crimson-wings must be very hardy.

Members of the African Serins, of which I have several species, have nested.
The St. Helena Seedeater, Serinus flaviventris, produced one young after three
nests, all of which collapsed. White-bellied Seedeaters, S. f. dorsostriatus , have
two young flying. Also, at the moment, two races of Yellow-rumped Serins,
S. atrogularis xanthopygius from Eritrea, and S. a. reichenowi from East Africa
are both nesting. Two races of the more typical type of S. atrogularis from
South Africa have made no attempt at nesting as yet. Only one of the four races
has the black throat. The Eritrean bird is placed with atrogularis in the books
but I feel that this must be a mistake. Song and behaviour is so different. All
these are delightful little birds, no trouble, and industrious charming songsters,
among which great confusion is caused by the various dealers names.

While some live food might have been obtained in the aviaries I was in no position
to find the time to give them the attention as to feeding that the various experts
expound. I found the Cryptospiza need, like the Twinspot with which they have
a great affinity, lots of live food to get them going when newly imported; so it is
surprising that my birds brought off a normal nest of three young with the only
greenfly and the chickweed supplied by A. V. Griffiths during the short time that
he was here.

I am aware that the St. Helena Seedeaters have been bred on several occasions
but have come across no reports of breeding of the Red-faced Crimson -wing,
White-bellied Seedeater or Eritrean Yellow-rumped Series in this country.

Peter Paris.

NOTES

169

CORRESPONDENCE

RARE AND VANISHING AMAZONA PARROTS

To the November-December, 1969, number of the Avicultural Magazine
I contributed a short note with the above title. Unfortunately though, I omitted
an important sentence, which made for ambiguity. The figure of half a million
birds referred to all species of Amazon basin parrots, not only to the genus Amazona.
Despite this lapse I was more than a little surprised that anyone should interpret
it to mean that half a million birds of all species were imported into this country
annually. The figure was intended to apply to the U.S.A. only, and not to this
country. A widely-read weekly publication suggested that the estimate was a
“ fantastic exaggeration ”, and asked “ Can anyone honestly think that 500,000
Amazons were taken? ” An answer is half a million Amazona Parrots, No:
half a million South American parrots and parrakeets, YES.

I cannot claim any great knowledge of the bird trade as operated at present,
but I have vivid recollections of several large consignments of parrots, mainly
Roseate Cockatoos, Lovebirds and Ring-necked Parrakeets arriving in a deplorable
state, many of the birds being either dead or dying shortly after arrival in England.
Perhaps I am prejudiced but I, for one, can well-believe that for every live South
American parrot sold in an American pet shop 50 have died, for one reason or
another.

Christopher Weathersbee, after a close study of what he describes as the “ Amazon
Parrot Raid,” has made known some of his findings in Science News, 4th January
1969, and Peruvian Times, 21st November 1969. The following are extracts.
Since the lifting of the Parrot Ban in the U.S.A. in 1967 it has been quite a fad
to own a parrot of some kind. Pet shops have been selling them as a “ novelty ”
as fast as they can obtain them. A buyer for F. W. Woolworth, a chain that does a
significant portion of the nation’s pet selling, says the demand is such that birds
cannot be captured fast enough to satisfy it. The prices range up to $50.00 each,
and average between $30.00 and $20.00 Weathersbee says: “ The South American
parrots are collected in the forests by Indians, who bring them to the nearest
riverbank. There they are purchased for a few cents by buyers who cruise up
and down the river until they have a boatload. The survivors of the boatload
are sold to the Bogota centre or abroad.”

“ One of the things that has conservationists upset about the parrot trade is that
there may be very few such survivors. It has been estimated that for every live
bird sold in an American pet shop, 50 have died. Many are killed during collec¬
tion, either by rough handling or in order to reach the coveted young. Many
more die in cages waiting for the buyer at the river, and the toll continues after the
entrepreneur as acquired his charges. Thus to satisfy a demand for 10,000 pet
parrots (in the neighborhood of the number imported in the past year) as many as
half a million birds may have been destroyed.”

Dr. Maria Buchinger, Head of the Latin America Desk of the Nature Con¬
servancy, says a side effect of the animal trade is the subversion of the backwoods
Indians’ economy. What happens, she says, is that the buyers will patronize a
particular section of the river while the parrots are plentiful there. For a few
months or a couple of years some of the Indians will earn a tiny amount which
they nevertheless consider good, easy money. In the meanwhile they will neglect
to maintain their farms and other traditional means of living, so marginal as a rule
that they can stand little neglect. Then the birds become scarce from the over¬
hunting and the buyers move on, leaving the Indians with neither crop, cash
income, savings nor any long-term benefit from their collecting.

Robert Neeley, a former hunting guide in Colombia who now refuses to take
anything but photographic parties, says such disruption of tribal affairs, plus the
consciousness that foreigners are hunting out vital native game supplies, has made
many Indian chieftains ardent conservationists. There are still enough Indians
who fall prey to temptations, however, to keep the animals coming out of the
jungle.

Galley’s Wood, A. A. Prestwich.

Edenbridge, Kent.

# * *

P

CORRESPONDENCE

17O

FEEDING PARROTS

I was interested in the correspondence in the Avicultural Magazine about
feeding parrots. As you may know I have kept a small collection of cockatoos for
about 20 years and have bred a few most years. One citron-crest hen has reared
almost every year for about 15 years and roseates have performed similarly. My
birds receive adequate attention but not as much as I could sometimes wish.

As your correspondents indicate very little if any controlled experimentation
has been carried out on the diets of cage-birds — such work is extremely expensive
apart from anything else — but one can assume a few general principles, e.g. that
a bird can’t produce protein from carbohydrate without nitrogen, and as a con¬
sequence a diet of low-protein grain is not likely to be sufficient for breeding
birds — and there is, of course a very great amount of information about the diet
of domestic poultry. Pheasant breeders have cashed in directly on this information
and, as many appreciate, turkey starter crumbs supply an excellent supplementary
diet for many species of birds.

I have always supplied my cockatoos with supplements to a basic grain diet
and these include hard-boiled egg, bread and milk and a variety of household
scraps including cooked meat scraps and bones including ham bones. It is fairly
certain that a breeding pair feels the need for meat and I believe that many years
ago I reported in the Magazine how a citron-crest hen used to catch and eat
sparrows. Feather plucking is a terrible thing and it is quite certain that nobody
knows how to cure it. Of the four species I have kept, Leadbeaters and roseates
have never plucked, citrons occasionally and the Timor race of the Lesser sulphur-
crest, badly. It must be appreciated that like most others I am speaking of what
in a statistical sense is a very small number of birds. Plucking seems to be of
two kinds, the mild (particularly breast) plucking which I am inclined to associate
with some sort of frustration in the breeding cycle and I have had a breeding pair
suddenly and for no apparent reason wreck themselves in a day, subsequently
recover and never do it again and the chronic type which I am inclined to believe
starts in a caged bird from boredom but subsequently fails to respond to anything
including liberty or freedom in an aviary with a breeding partner.

There may be cases where plucking is associated with ecto-parasites or with
diet but I believe the major cause is psychological. By analogy some of the worst
of this type of behaviour is seen in the intensive poultry and pig units (tail biting)
and it is extremely difficult to believe that diet is involved here.

I was delighted to see the notes about feeding lories and lorikeets. My
experience is limited to Swainson’s which is reputed to be the easiest, but with
them I certainly have had no trouble at all. I have two breeding pairs that produce
one or two young with unfailing regularity and I have a colony (eight birds) which
has its first baby ready to fledge. Essentially they get a basic diet of a pint of
full-cream milk between them with a home made nectar addition of equal parts of
Farex, runny honey and sweetened condensed milk with a liberal addition of
ordinary white sugar. Sunflower seed is supplied ad lib. and the milk-nectar
mixture has a large piece of bread put in it which the birds eat or waste. They
get very little fruit except in the apple season. Grapes are by repute such an
indifferent food that it seems hardly worthwhile. During the winter I occasionally
give cod-liver oil or some of the household orange concentrate with a reputed
vitamin A and C content. I give them bits of meat and bones at times and would
think it a good idea: I have given egg on occasion. Presumably they get most of
their protein from the milk. The historical difficulty of keeping the group alive is
interesting because it seemed to apply to Swainson’s as well as the other species
that I would fully accept as being much more difficult. I have never seen the
condition described as “ fits ” but Tom Spence told me he had been called in to
attend to a Swainson’s Lorikeet so suffering and that it had responded miraculously
to an injection with vitamin B — 12 (if I am misquoting him he will, I’m sure, let
us know). The bird may, of course, have reacted to having a needle stuck in it!

Having had some association with Tom’s big collection of lories in Scotland,
which included such exotic things as the Black Lory I developed a mistrust of their
capacity for survival which is only now mildly fading with my experience of my
Swainson’s. Mr. Murray’s experiences with the Yellow-backs is encouraging and
there must be many who during the last two or three years have had numerous

CORRESPONDENCE

171

species. Several breeding reports have been published. Have these birds
continued in good health and have there been any second generation breedings?
I need a little encouragement to have a go with another species.

S. B. Kendall.

Weir Cottage,

Bridge Road, Chertsey,

Surrey, England.

# # #

TOOL-USING BY BIRDS

I don’t know as to whether tool-using has been described in birds other than
the Galapagos Woodpecker Finch ( Camarhynchos pallidus) which many of us may
have seen on a Television film. The bird uses a beak-held twig to give an
extension of its bill to probe insects from cracks and crannies. And certain
Bower-birds, for example the Satin Bower-bird ( Ptilonorhynchus violacea), use
deeply-staining, burst berries as paint brushes to decorate their bowers. Recently
I have seen a Bare-eyed Cockatoo ( Cacatua sanguined) which when offered a dead
matchstick would hold it in the claw and quite deliberately, though admittedly
with little facility, use it to scratch (poke might be the more descriptive word) the
throat area immediately under and posterior to the base of the lower mandible.
It did this in a dreamy sort of ecstatic way as would be expected if it gave the bird
the same sort of physical satisfaction as stroking or mutual preening would. Not
every proference of a matchstick was so treated for if the bird was lively or excited
it would chew them up. I suppose that Mr. Sidney Porter’s account of his Keas
which would, if given a tin, use it to bale out any container of water, is an even
better illustration of the use of a tool by a parrot.

158 Broadway, G. A. Smith.

Peterborough, PEi 4DG,

England.

# # #

AVICULTURISTS

On page 77 of the section, “ News and Views ” of Volume 76 of your Avicultural
Magazine, is an excerpt from the Los Angeles Times implying that I was insulted
at being classed as an aviculturist and that I said “An aviculturist is a zoo keeper ”.
The paragraph also contained an admonition to me to bear in mind the past
contributions of aviculturists.

For the record, I should like to categorically deny having made the remarks
attributed to me, or any other comments that might be even remotely construed
to imply disparagement of aviculture or zoo keeping. During the interview on
which this article was based, I was somewhat concerned that the reporter took
very few written notes and persistently asked leading questions obviously intended
to evoke controversy. The same technique apparently was followed in inter¬
viewing another individual mentioned in the article, resulting in a tart letter from
him denying several assertions contained in the story. I, too, prepared a letter
intended to correct the record, but was asked by higher authority not to send it
because (1) my objections were likely to be considered trivial by the editor of the
publication in which the story first appeared, (2) the corrections would not reach
the several other newspapers in which it was reprinted, and (3) the story, on the
whole, was favorable to our program.

The zoo personnel and private aviculturists with whom we work, many of whom
are close friends, know my high respect for their contributions to the art of animal¬
keeping and breeding. We have borrowed extensively from their literature, as
well as from their undocumented stores of knowledge. Our veterinarian was a
member of the Lincoln Park Zoo before joining our program, and two of our
technicians formerly were with the National Zoological Park. We have utilized
the counsel of aviculturists in propagation building design and the services of
others in the breeding of certain species for which we have no facilities. My

172

CORRESPONDENCE

staff and I are in frequent contact with them for mutually valuable exchanges of
other information, and we have provided stock of rare and endangered species
to a number of them on indefinite loan. As active participants, we attend several
meetings each year that are devoted exclusively or in part to the care of wildlife
species in captivity, and our Station is visited annually by dozens of aviculturists,
zoo administrators, and technicians from this and other countries, including
England.

Happily, the great preponderance of newspaper and magazine story coverage
of our project has been objectively, understandably, and quite accurately written,
and since staff and facility limitations do not allow us to encourage public visitation,
we appreciate this means of informing the many interested individuals and
organizations of our activities. However, working as we do with a most interesting
and emotionally charged subject, our disappearing wildlife species, we will predict
with reasonable certainty that additional misinterpretations of our objectives and
remarks will take place in the coming months and years. Whenever events of that
nature again raise questions or doubts regarding this program or the reported
utterances of its staff, we would welcome the opportunity to reply to the situation
before a judgment is reported in your magazine.

Unfortunately, quotations in the press sometimes are used extremely loosely
or even erroneously by some writers, and anyone who has had even infrequent
exposure to interviewing is chagrined at liberties that are taken in “ reproducing ”
the spoken word. A very good friend who also is a zoo director, when I called to
comment upon the article mentioned above, may have summed up the situation
best by saying the following (or words to that effect): “ Your friends know the
remarks were inaccurate, but count your blessings. At least they spelled your
name correctly! ”

Ray C. Erickson,

U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Assistant Director for

Wildlife Service, Endangered Wildlife Research.

Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center.

The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles,
notes, or correspondence.

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY: 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier
PRICES OF ADMISSION

Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicultural Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 4s. ( non-members ) Children: 2/6

Parties of 25 and over : 2/6 each Organised school parties : 1 /6 each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance

NO DOGS ALLOWED

HOW TO GET TO THE WILDLIFE PARK

Cromer

Hunstanton

The Ornamental Pheasant Trust and Norfolk Wildlife Park are on the main
A1067— 14 miles from Norwich.

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A36 at The Red Lion, Wooiverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

OPEN DAILY
including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

No dogs admitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 324

ANDEAN AND JAMES’S
FLAMINGOS

CONDORS - TOUCANS - MACAWS

Etc.

ROMERO AND CIA LTDA
CASILLA POSTAL 682
SANTA CRUZ
BOLIVIA

ANTiQU ARI AAT JUNK N.V.

POSTBOX 5, LOCH EM, HOLLAND

offers . . .

J0RGENSEN, NOMINA
AVIUM EUROPAEARUM

Copenhagen, 1958 294 pp. Cloth FI. 17.50

Contains 579 names of European birds in 21 languages

We are specialists in ornithological books
Please send for our latest Aves list

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

( Established 1956)

Invites your membership. Subscription $2.00 Aust. Due on the
1 st January each year. Magazine dealing with all aspects of
aviculture posted each month. Back issues supplied where
available.

Send application to:

The Secretary: W. L. Burns, P.O. Box 55, Morley, 6062,
Western Australia.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the:

Hon Secretary, Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone: Henlow Camp 342

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members' advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement , which must be sent to A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column, but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable.

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

Members of the Society have the exclusive privilege of joining
the Club. Members normally resident abroad are invited by
the Club to regard themselves as temporary members and to
attend any meetings during a visit to this country.

Members of the Society not already members of the Club
should write to the Hon. Secretary for particulars of membership.

When Visiting the

COTSWOLDS

AVICULTURISTS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

The Avicultural Society of America

Founded 1927

Hon. President: Dr. Jean Deiacour.

President: Mr. David King
Secretary: Richard C. Frantzen,

13914 Don Julian Road, La Puente, California 91746, U.S.A.

The Society year begins January 1st, but new members may join
at any time and are entitled to the back issues of the AVICULTURAL
BULLETIN, Roster for the current year and a copy of the By Laws.
One membership includes husband and wife. The annual dues
for domestic (Canada & Mexico included) membership are $4.00.
Foreign dues are $5.00. Please send remittance to the Membership
Secretary, Mrs. Marian Wagner, 565 East Channel Rd., Santa
Monica, California 90402. Make your check payable to
Avicultural Society of America. Foreign applicants please remit
dues by International Bank Draft or Money Order only.

The Awieultural Society o? South Australia

Founded 1928

The oldest Avicultural Society in Australia invites all interested in
aviculture to become members. Subscription is £ 1 5s. 0 d. sterling
per annum, and this includes a monthly magazine Bird Keeping
in Australia mailed to all members. This is entirely original and deals
with the keeping and breeding of many Australian and exotic
species of birds.

Please forward membership application and subscription to the
Secretary, Eric Baxter, 17 Benjamin Street, Manningham,

South Australia, 5086.

The Avicultural Society of Australia

Catering for the English-speaking breeders of Australian birds
throughout the world. Monthly magazine Australian Aviculture
posted free to all members.

Overseas subscriptions : United States of America, $3.00;
all other countries, Aust. $2.50.

Secretary, Frank A. Ripper 10 Tyne Street, Burwood,

Victoria, 3125, Australia.

A Guide to the
Names of Parrots

A complete list of the scientific names admitted by
Peters, together with their derivations and
appropriate English names.

Price 5s. 6d., post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

STUDIES ON GREAT CRESTED
GREBES

By

K. E. L. SIMMONS
Price 5/6 post free

o-

PUBLISHED BY

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY
GALLEY’S WOOD
EBENBRIDGE, KENT

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGS DEN BIRD GARDENS

The largest private collection of ornamental game birds in the
British Isles, also Waterfowl and Rare Breeds of Poultry, etc.

Open every day

10 a.m. to 7 p.m. or sunset if earlier

Send 3/- for a 40 -page brochure

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422
The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Tel.: Oakley 2745

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10-14
Macklin Street, London, W.C.2, to whom members should address all orders
for extra copies and back numbers. Subscription and back number orders from
non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., $6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wykeham
Press, 85 High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained, price 1 5s. each, postage extra. Alternatively the
printers can undertake the binding of complete current volumes (for which they
have binding cases in stock), price £2 per volume, postage extra. They can
also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for which
binding cases have to be specially made), price £2 10s., postage extra. Members
are requested to state whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be
bound with the volume.

NEW MEMBERS

The twenty- three Candidates for Membership in the May-June 1970, number
of the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

CORRECTED ADDRESSES

John S. Ambrose, 33 Lewis Road, Wantirna South 3152, Victoria, Australia.

Jean Darmagnac, 18 Rue du Maupas, 58 Nevers, France.

T. D. Rothery, Birchcliffe, Stanah Road, Thornton, Nr. Blackpool, FY5 5JG.
Alfred L. Wheeler, Firestone Plantations Company, Harbel, Liberia, West

Africa.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Robert Stewart Constable, to 33895 Road 168, Visalia, California 93277, U.S.A.
Miss Jane Cooper, to Apt. 201, 120 Bulkley, Sausalito, California 94965, U.S.A.
Frank Grant, to 123 Davenport Road, Leicester, LE5 6SE.

Mrs. Ruby P. Hood, to Whispering Winds Ranch, 34608 Ave. “ G,” Yucaipa,
California 92399, U.S.A.

Lawrence Gordon Holloway, to “ Shearwaters ”, off Willowhale Avenue,
Aldwick, Bognor Regis, Sussex.

Michel HouzS, to 1039 A. route de la Fontaine Bouillon, 59 St. Amand les Eaux,
Nord, France.

Kurt Kraus, to 63 Giessen-Wieseck, Ludw.-Richter Str. 24, Western Germany.
John David Lindsay, to 25 Dyne Road, Kilbum, London, N.W.6.

Mrs. Katherine McKeever, to RR 1, Vineland Station, Ontario, Canada.

P. D. Muller, to Lower Farm, Cottered, Nr. Buntingford, Herts.

A. Paul Ockenden, to 3402 Laurel Avenue, Cheverly, Maryland 20785, U.S.A.
Peter Odekerken, to 192 Idlewild, Kapteijn Street, Hillbrow, Johannesburg,
South Africa.

Leif J. SkArdal, to Chapmansgaten 16, S-414 54 Gothenburg, Sweden.

Dr. T. G. Taylor, to 12 Russell Place, Southampton, SO2 iNU.

Maurice Yesson, to ii Flint Road, Coombe Glen, Up Hatherley, Cheltenham,
Glos.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

Roy N. Bogan, 3215 Strickland Street, Baltimore, Md. 21229, U.S.A. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

Michael Ernest Bowyer, East Lodge, Marston Park, Nr. Frome, Somerset.
Proposed by M. Curzon.

Mark Coslov, 1411 Commonwealth Avenue, Brighton, Mass. 02135, U.S.A.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Mrs. Adele H. Davide, 13 Brookfield Park, Parliament Hill Fields, London,
N.W.5. Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Krishna Dutta, 4b Bhattarcharjee Lane, Dharamtalla Street, Calcutta 13, India.
Proposed by Edward R. FitzSimmons.

Dr. Augusto Nim Ferreira, 431 Rua Voluntaries da Patria, Casa 19, Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil. Proposed by Dr. Etienne Beraut.

Charles Robert Giovetti, C.P. 2042, Luanda, Angola, West Africa. Proposed
by J. J. Mallet.

Gordon Hardaker, York Lodge, 28 Southfield, Hessle, E. Yorks. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

Alan Robert Johnson, 5 South Close, Bishopston, Gower, Swansea, Glam.
Proposed by W. R. Holmes.

Percy Kinchington, 29 Elmes Drive, Millbrook, Southampton, SO 1 4PH, Hants.
Proposed by T. A. G. Gibson.

Mrs. C. M. Knowlton, 2434 Connaught Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Major Mark H. Magnussen, 8412 Wagon Wheel Road, Alexandria, Virginia
22309, U.S.A. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Brother Gabriel Rivet, o.s.b., Saint Joseph Abbey, Saint Benedict, Louisiana
70457, U.S.A. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Agnita Jeanne Frida Dom van Rombeek, The Old House, South Street, Sher¬
borne, Dorset. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

K. L. Rossi, Rogues Hill House, Penshurst, Kent. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.
Anthony Michael Sturgeon, 34 High Oak Road, Ware, Herts. Proposed by
A. A. Prestwich.

Mario Ventura, 302 Rua Torres Homen, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Proposed by
Dr. Etienne Beraut.

William Werntz, R D i, Willow Street, Pa. 17584, U.S.A. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

Kennett M. Westmacott, Brockdam, Chathill, Northumberland. Proposed by
M. Curzon.

Arthur Stanley John White, 96 Cornwallis Road, Cowley, Oxford OX4 3NL.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

DONATIONS

(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel
G. Touchard
B. M. Williams
J. R. Wood

Madame A. Billot
J. Bunker
Dr. G. Cigna
Dr. H. W. Clarke

J. F. Doughty
W. A. Howe
D. W. Muirhead
Aage V. Nielsen

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

tytr'cL*)

H-t

AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 5
SEPTEMBER— OCTOBER
1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

PAGE

The Black-headed Bush Shrike ( Tchagra senegala), (with coloured plate),

by Jean Delacour . . . . . . . . . 173

Breeding Black-crested Finches or Pigmy Cardinals ( Lophospingus pusillus),

by Leila Leitch . . . . . 174

Notes on the Breeding and Behaviour of Japanese Quails, ( Coturnixjaponica ),

by R. Unwin Lambert . . . .177

Notes on a pair of Longtailed Parrakeets ( Psittacula longicaudata ), by

G, A. Smith . 179

Breeding in Captivity of the European Bee-eater, the Carmine Bee-eater,

and of a Hybrid between the two, (with plates), by E. Callegari . . 186

Breeding the Blue-crowned Motmot ( Momotus momota), at the Winged World
by Clive Roots .......... 188

Breeding the Thailand Hoopoe ( Upupa epops longirostris), at the

Winged World by Clive Roots . . . . . . .189

Subspecies and Aviculture: some notes on recent difficulties, by C. J. O.
Harrison . 191

The Identification of the Kansu Babbler and Grey-headed Babbler, by

C. J. O. Harrison . 194

An Expedition to Alaska in search of Grouse and Ptarmigan and on the
way back a vistit to the Western district of America (with plate), by
Yukio Nakata . 195

Extinct, Vanishing and Hypothetical Parrots, by A. A. Prestwich . . 198

Berlin Zoo Notes, by Dr. Heinz-Georg Klos . 204

London Zoo Notes, by P. J. S. Olney ...... 205

New and Views .......... 206

Reviews ............ 210

Notes ............ 212

Corrigendum ........... 212

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.

Assistant Editor: C. J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

Avicult. Mag.

Black-headed Bush Shrike

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 76. — No. 5. — All rights reserved. SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

THE BLACK-HEADED BUSH SHRIKE

( Tchagra senegala)

By Jean Delacour (Cleres, France)

Shrikes consist of three sub-families of the family Laniidae. To the
average European or North American interested in birds, the true shrikes
of the genus Lanius are the best known. They extend in range over Europe,
Asia, Indonesia, Africa and North America and are familiar to many in
the wild state. They look like miniature birds of prey, although true
passerine birds. Few aviculturists keep them in captivity as they cannot
be associated with other birds on account of their murderous instincts.
They are, however, handsome and interesting, and some have a pretty
song. They are fed mostly on meat and do not present special problems.

The other two families inhabit Africa only. The Helmeted Shrikes
( Prionopinae ) are completely insectivorous, and harmless to other birds.
Some beautiful species have been kept successfully in aviaries. The
Bush Shrikes (Malaconotinae) are represented throughout Africa by
numerous species of several genera. A number of them are very beautiful
and fairly often kept in zoos and private aviaries, particularly the brightly
coloured ones, such as certain species of Laniarius with much crimson in
their plumage. Several genera are composed of insectivorous birds which
are not too dangerous to other birds. Such is the case of the Black¬
headed Bush Shrike depicted on the accompanying plate. It is not gaudily
coloured, but its sombre pattern is elegant. This species is the only one
of the whole sub-family represented in Mediterranean Africa, as one
sub-species ( culcullata ) is found locally in thick bush in the coastal districts
of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. Numerous others are found throughout
Africa. It is a shy bird, difficult to detect in the thickets, except when,
in the spring, if comes out in a nuptial flight. It feeds almost entirely on
beetles.

This Bush Shrike sings very well. It has, however, seldom been kept
in captivity.

* # *

R

SMITHSONIAN

INSTITUTION

174

LEILA LEITCH— BREEDING BLACK-CRESTED FINCHES

BREEDING BLACK-CRESTED FINCHES
OR PIGMY CARDINALS

(Lophospingus pusillus)

By Leila Leitch

( Stratford-upon-Avon, W arwickshire)

My pair of imported Pigmy Cardinals was purchased from a friend
who is a dealer, and introduced into a small planted aviary with heated
shelter, where they settled happily with a collection of mixed small foreign
seed-eaters.

At the time, midsummer 1968, I was inexperienced in aviculture and
did not know of the difficulties experienced by some breeders in success¬
fully rearing the young of this species. Consequently I was gravely
concerned that only one from each of the first two broods in 1969 survived,
and became independent. Having followed all available information to the
letter, I was particularly strict in the rationing of mealworms, but only in
this season have I had true success having six healthy and hardy youngsters
in the aviary.

The breeding notes which I have made are as follows :

1. Nesting Site.

The pair chose a site well screened, where there was a hand-made
basket of finch-basket size but with two entrances. The site was in the
inside flight where light, heat and a reasonable humidity prevailed. In
the basket the hen constructed a very small fragile nest of hemp and sheeps’
wool. Here she laid her two eggs, grey /green and brownish spotted, and
these she incubated for exactly twelve days while the cock sang sweetly.
After the first nesting a replica of the first nest was built in the same basket
beside the other; these have been used alternately throughout the season
and are still in a spotless condition.

2. Nesting Behaviour.

The hen did all the incubating but the cock was ever attentive, bringing
her morsels from time to time and conducting her to and from the feeding
station in the short periods she spent off the nest. Only when the hen
was off the nest did he show aggression towards other birds, apart from
normal defence of the site.

3. The Nestlings.

The young when hatched, showed downy growth very quickly with a
distinctive “ top-knot ” feathering. As they gained in strength they
became active and noisy in their demands for food.

LEILA LEITCH — BREEDING BLACK-CRESTED FINCHES

175

This demanding nature led me to question whether early losses were
due to strict rationing of high-protein mealworms. A more generous
supply produced healthy vital growth.

4. Diet.

For the first day the hen took to her brood crumbled hard-boiled egg
and soft cheese mixed with Abidec. Thereafter both parents brought
food to the nest. The diet offered was as follows :

(i) Mealworms: The parents fed the contents of two mealworms per
nestling every hour on days two, three, four and five. The quantity was
then increased and the chicks were given the entire worm. By the time
they were fledged and left the nest on the twelfth day, they were fed ten
mealworms each several times a day. This assessment is accurate as both
parents preferred to take mealworms from my hand direct to the chicks
rather than collect the food from the feeding station.

I hesitated and doubted the prudence of my generosity, but I can only
comment that when mealworms were rationed the young died, the
parents giving all available food to one chick only.

(ii) Gentles: These were always available as alternative live food,
but the parents gave them sparingly, although once independent the young
took them readily.

(iii) Proprietary soft foods, insectivorous mixtures etc.: The parents
used these but rarely although they were observed to feed upon them
themselves while saving the live food for the young.

(iv) Fruit flies: A culture of fruit flies was maintained but these were
not taken to the nestlings. When independent the young birds enjoyed
the fruit flies.

(v) Sponge, mixed with honey, beef extract, rose-hip syrup, Cytacon,
and water : This has proved an excellent food factor in the healthy develop¬
ment of all my young birds, not least the Pigmy Cardinals. The parents
took the mixture to the nestlings at regular intervals, it was the first food
the fledglings took for themselves, and I hand reared one ailing baby Pigmy
Cardinal with this mixture and other diet mentioned here.

This chick learned to feed from forceps and grew to be quite vigorous,
but it had a poor sense of balance and unhappily drowned in the aviary
bath after five months of independent living.

(vi) Soft cheese “ salad ”: This was used by the parents, and in the
hand rearing. It comprises cottage cheese, finely-chopped egg, grated
apple, Bemax, and finely-chopped lettuce or water-cress. I may add that
this is popular with other parent birds, and with all birds in the aviary.
For hand-rearing purposes it was dipped in pounded seed and helped to
teach the young bird to take seed.

(vii) Soaked millet spray: Once the hen went to nest again the cock
bird took over the rearing of the young. Although he fed them mealworms

176

LEILA LEITCH — BREEDING BLACK-CRESTED FINCHES

almost exclusively at first, he also taught them to eat the sponge mixture,
and trained them to eat softened millet spray and to pick up grit.

Incidentally, as I had read, he showed a preference for one chick each
time and was grudging in his maintenance of the other. In a brood of
three he killed the strongest of the chicks before I could come to the
rescue. I understand that he is supposed to favour the young cocks;
certainly one chick in each pair tends to sit beside mother while she
incubates her eggs, the other goes exploring with the cock. Once indepen¬
dent the young develop at an equal rate and it is impossible to determine
whether “ father’s favourite ” was the young cock.

5. General Observation.

Only once have I seen evidence of the young being plucked in readiness
for a new nest to be lined. On this occasion a plentiful supply of sheep’s
wool distracted parental attention from the downy breast feathers of the
young.

When the newest nestlings became more demanding the cock drove the
independent youngsters out into the flight. He was never over-aggressive,
but the youngsters were disturbed by the behaviour and were removed from
the flight to the independent existence of a separate flight. This rejection
is at four to five weeks after they leave the nest.

The young birds I have in my collection live together quite happily and
although they show true Pigmy Cardinal self assertion in establishing
themselves high in the pecking order, they only evolve their order among
themselves according to age. This process has yet to be observed when
they come into breeding condition. This I believe is at about nine to
twelve months.

Unfortunately my aviary conditions are so limited that I will be unable
to keep all my young Pigmy Cardinals, although I shall make every effort
to develop a strain of aviary bred birds, by retaining some of my own young
birds and introducing new stock from time to time.

R. UNWIN LAMBERT — BREEDING AND BEHAVIOUR OF JAPANESE QUAILS I JJ

NOTES ON THE BREEDING AND BEHAVIOUR
OF JAPANESE QUAILS

( Coturnix japonica)

By R. Unwin Lambert (Reigate, Surrey, England)

In March of this year I purchased a pair of three-week-old Japanese
Quail, Coturnix japonica , and placed them in a small aviary having a
ground measurement of 6 ft. 6 in. x 4 ft., in company with a pair of Chinese
Painted Quail, Excalfactoria chinensis. The aviary has an earth floor and
although it was planted with a selection of herbaceous plants the majority
of these were stripped as soon as they started to grow. Although the
aviary has a small hut in which the birds can shelter they have not yet used
it — preferring to sit-out in the rain. As the aviary is, however, well
drained the birds have not come to any harm ; but no doubt other arrange¬
ments will have to be made later in the year.

The quail (both species) are fed on a mixture of high protein turkey
starter crumbs, pannicun and white millet. At first this mixture was
given in a ratio of 50% starter crumbs, 30% pannicum and 20% white
millet. This mixture has now, however, been changed, for reasons given
later, to a ratio of 30% starter crumbs, 40% pannicum and 30% white
millet. In addition a plentiful supply of grit and greenfoods are given;
the Japanese Quail preferring greenfoods more than the Chinese Painted
Quail, and in both species the hen has a higher preference for it than the
cock bird.

When they were approximately seven weeks old the Japanese Quail
laid their first egg in a small scrape in one corner of the aviary, the scrape
being about six inches in diameter and an inch deep in the centre. Subse¬
quent eggs being laid at a rate of one per day. At no time, however, have
the cock or hen showed any inclination to incubate the eggs ; on the contrary
the eggs were often rolled out of the scrape to a distance of a few feet away
and then abandoned. At this stage I decided to purchase a small incubator
into which were placed eight eggs. At the same time two eggs were placed
under a Barbary Dove, Streptopelia roseogrisea “ risoria ”, her own eggs
being removed. Although my pair of Barbary Doves, which are kept in
another aviary, lay and incubate their own eggs regularly no eggs have
yet been hatched.

The incubator proved unreliable from the start as it was very difficult
to maintain the correct temperature and it was not surprising therefore
that after the incubation period (approx. 18 days) no eggs were hatched.
On inspection fifty per cent of the eggs showed some development of the
embryo. However the two eggs being incubated by the Barbary Doves
hatched successfully; the first egg after 19 days, the second a day later.
The chicks were immediately removed and placed in a small box which

178 R. UNWIN LAMBERT — BREEDING AND BEHAVIOUR OF JAPANESE QUAILS

was heated by a 60 watt electric light bulb placed inside an earthenware
flower pot. At nights the top of the box was covered with a piece of
underfelt.

As soon as they had dried out the chicks began to feed on finely ground
turkey starter crumbs and by the end of the first week their size had more
than trebled. Over the following two weeks I gradually reduced the
amount of heat given until I judged that the chicks were big and fit enough
to go into the outside quail aviary. A certain amount of bullying was
shown towards them by the adults, but after a few days they were ignored
except for the occasional chasing.

I now depend solely on the Barbary Doves for hatching the quails eggs
and at the time of writing these notes in July two more Japanese Quails
and one Chinese Painted Quail have been hatched (the C.P.Q. having the
same tendency to abandon their eggs), and are at present being reared
before being placed outside.

Obviously there are drawbacks to hatching quail’s eggs in this way, the
main one being that the doves cannot or will not incubate more than two
Japanese and two Chinese Painted Quails eggs at the same time. Also of
course the doves may lose interest and abandon the eggs before they are
hatched.

In order to help reduce the number of eggs being laid, which were
beginning to show signs of being thin-shelled, I changed the food mixture
as outlined earlier in these notes, hoping that the reduction of the high
protein starter crumbs would help reduce the number of eggs being laid,
but this has not yet proved successful. Apart from this food mixture I have
found that the Japanese Quails have a passion for mealworms, and I am
now able to hand feed the original pair of birds purchased. I have found
however that the female eats a larger proportion of the mealworms than

Fig. 1

the male. When the male is given a worm he holds it, with lowered head,
in his beak uttering soft “ croaking ” noises (see Fig. 1). The female
then immediately dashes up and accepts or takes the mealworm from the
male, who then copulates or attempts to copulate with the female. Copula¬
tion takes place by the male jumping onto the female’s back, his legs on the
rear of the back and holding, with his beak onto the nape of the female’s

R. UNWIN LAMBERT — BREEDING AND BEHAVIOUR OF JAPANESE QUAILS 1 79

neck, and pulling hard (see Fig. 2). Mating usually lasts for two or three
seconds. If however, there are still some mealworms left uneaten the
female will attempt to reach them with the male clinging to her. This

usually results in the loss of a few feathers from the female’s neck, and
the courtship-feeding again taking place.

Courtship-feeding happens every time the male is given a mealworm,
and it follows therefore that if the male is given for example five mealworms
(not of course all at the same time) he will “ courtship-feed ” the female
and mate or attempt to mate five times. The same applies to a lesser
extent with the Chinese Painted Quails, although in their case copulation
is less frequent — the male merely “ giving ” the mealworms to the female.

# # #

NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED
PARRAKEETS

( Psittacula longicaudata )

By G. A. Smith (Peterborough, England)

The Longtailed Parrakeet is generally held to be the anomalous member
of its genus. For whereas the others usually prove good aviary birds Long-
tails are supposed to be unduly sensitive to cold. The Marquis of
Tavistock (1927), for example, wrote that “ they feel the cold more than
any other parrakeet. Requiring a temperature of not less than 70° F.
and are likely to die should it fall below 6o° F. : for which reason we
cannot hope to keep and rear them ”. More recently Rutgers (1969)
voices the same opinion.

Last summer my attention was caught by an advertisement in “ Cage
and Aviary Birds ” for an acclimatised pair of Malayan Longtailed
Parrakeets. These had been kept in a small outside aviary for the previous
eighteen months. The unheated shed, to which the flight was attached
also served as a bird-room — having cages around the walls— and in one

180 G. A. SMITH - NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS

of these the Longtails roosted for the night, gaining entry through a
permanently open bob-hole. They were being disposed of because they
proved too noisy, in the early morning, for the tolerance of the surrounding
householders. As they had been sold I eventually acquired them, third
hand, from a dealer.

By now it was autumn and the cock was a rather dishevelled individual
with the long centre rectrices, from which the species gets its name,
broken off short. The hen, was an equally ragged, dowdy, almost
uniformly khaki-coloured bird. In late October /early November I
noticed that the supposed hen was moulting out into a cock bird. However
my fear about “ changing sex ” was mistaken. She gained orange cheek
patches and assumed a greener cap but otherwise remained her normal
drab self. She soon proved to be no exception to the Psittacula rule of hen
birds being aggressive towards the males out of the breeding season. For
although extremely timid her antipathy towards her mate was so strong
that she would pursue and snap at him even when I stood but a few feet
off, her aggression towards him being far stronger than her fear of
myself. Therefore the cock was removed and brought inside for the winter
which he spent in a metal box-cage standing close to the window of an
extremely cold, disused bedroom; so cold that the water pot often froze
solid during the night. The belligerent hen was left with my dealer friend,
housed in a wooden shed roofed over, for illumination, with transparent
plastic sheeting; giving an internal environment, except for wind and rain,
almost identical to that out of doors. I assume that it was because she
had to clamber down the netting of her inside flight to get her food,
which was placed on the floor, that she suffered from frost-bitten feet,
for, after the winter, she had lost the terminal phalanges of all save three
of her toes. It was definitely not caused by having snow or hoar-frost
gathering on the perches — often stated to be the cause of this injury. The
cock remained unaffected.

Over the winter both partly moulted: mostly those feathers used in
sex-recognition and display, the hen moulting her head and some central
tail feathers, the cock regained his glorious filamentous tail, a few primaries
and all of his head feathering. In February I collected the hen and put her
in the cage with the cock. Up till now all that they seemed to eat was
sunflower and apple. Only seldom would they take a little canary seed.
What was most pronounced was the extraordinary large amount of both
food and water consumed, resulting in the most copious quantities
of moist faeces. As moulds will grow even at very low air temperatures
they required cleaning out at very frequent intervals to avoid the risk of
contracting Aspergillosis. When offered fresh unshelled peanuts they
immediately stopped eating the sunflower and lived solely on these for
almost a fortnight. Then, appetite sated, restricted themselves to just a
few peanuts a day. It was as if the previous monotonous diet had
deprived them of some essential dietary need which, once satisfied, could

G. A. SMITH — NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS

181

be taken at a less liberal rate. Now they would eat grapes and orange.
They proved themselves to be exceptions to the general rule with parrots
in that they would not eat the exposed pips in a slice of apple before
the fruit. Indeed they left these delicacies entirely alone.

On the fifteenth of March they were put into a small outside aviary,
which they had to themselves; ten ft. long, six ft. high and three ft. wide,
with a small shelter for roosting in. Flying Longtailed Parrakeets remind
me much of Starlings. They whirr heavily weighted on short wings.
The thrust backwards given to the spar as they launch themselves into the
air, and the momentum of each landing impact, caused all the perches to
work loose, or to fall, within a few days of having them outside. Only
moderate woodchewers, their destructive attention was directed to
removing bark from branches, leaving the shelter alone. The short toe¬
nails are hooked in shape and once they flew, or blundered, onto the
wire they could clamber up and down but remained ensnared and fastened
firm when they tried to fly off — caught by their own nails. Like Starlings,
which also give the impression of awkwardness when flying in a confined
space, they are said when in the wild to perform mass aerial displays
before finally roosting for the night.

1 82 G. A. SMITH — NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS

Both sexes are rather stolid-looking characters, and the beauty that they
undoubtedly possess is to a large degree over-ruled by their stern and
forbidding-looking heads. When conscious of being watched both remain
perfectly still and unmoving. The cock, in contrast to the hen, and
irrespective of whichever direction his body faces, twists his head away
from the observer, such that he looks back, literally out of the corner of
his eye. For all the world as if he were frightfully shy and couldn’t bear
to face one head on (Fig. i). The head is also bunched onto the shoulders
and the adoption of this backwards facing posture of the head keeps the
red beak and much of the lovely Victoria-Plum-coloured cheeks hidden.
The only break in the green of the body and head is the dull mauve nape
of the neck. However, should an alarming movement be made by the
onlooker, to see the better the bird brings his head completely round and
then, if satisfied that no offence is intended, swivels it back to its almost
totally hidden viewpoint. While this may be characteristic of the cock
bird the hen (her head is less strikingly tinted and has a blackish beak)
will gaze full face or laterally with none of his “ coyness ”. The voice
has the most mechanical of tones. The call-note made to starlings flying
over the aviary sounds identical to the peeping of a child’s cheap toy
trumpet. However, unlike the neighbours of the original owners, I have
not found them noisy birds. And despite the tinnyness of all their
utterances they are not loud and certainly not irritating or unnecessarily
prolonged. They are most vociferous after, or before, heavy rain which
falls to interrupt an otherwise dry spell. The more usual incessant English
rain does not seem to have this power to “ lubricate ” their “ vocal
chords They do not sunbathe; though the hen would sometimes spend
the hotter part of the day roosting in full sun — whereas she could have,
and mostly did, seek shade in the shelter along with her mate. Likewise
they made no attempt to bathe in the bath provided or in the rain.
However, after summer showers they were often seen rubbing themselves
on the damp netting of the flight in an attempt to foliage bathe. Food
items larger than a seed and small enough to lift are raised in the foot
to the head. Seeding heads of sow-thistle and dandelion may be bitten
off and then lifted up in the foot instead of being eaten directly off the
plant as would most parrakeets. Out of the breeding season this pair are
rather timid; though less so than my aviary-bred Ringnecks. Too close
observation of them makes them sleek the plumage and shiver the body
with nervous tension. Coupled with this shivering the respiratory
movements become exaggerated and quite audible and to the uninitiated
might seem as if they were suffering from pneunomia.

Breeding Behaviour

In the wild they are said to lay in February or March (Ali and Ripley
1969) and I therefore held out no real hope of getting them to breed, the
cock still continued a desultory moult and I gave them no box. In early

G. A. SMITH — NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS 1 83

May the Longtails became unusually energetic. (Or probably, more
correctly, less prone to “ freeze ” when they saw me.) The cock
vigorously flapped his wings and called whenever birds larger than a
sparrow flew over. A week of spare time was wasted trying to saw a
length of hollow Ash log into a nesting chamber and then, thoroughly
exhausted by the effort, they were given a rather hastily-built box
fabricated from inch thick chip-board and with a plywood lid. Suspicious
as the birds were to anything new I was pleasantly surprised, two days
later, to see the cock peering into the nest hole. All courtship took place
on the top of the box, or in its very close proximity. They would start
very early at sunrise till perhaps 9 a.m., recommencing again in the late
afternoon — following the usual parrot siesta — for a further hour or so.
Almost all observations were taken from a twenty yard distant window and
because of this and also the hours they kept (they always roost full two
hours before any other birds in my small collection) my notes are a little
sporadic. Nevertheless though I was not fortunate enough to have them
breed they may prove of some slight interest.

In the breeding season the hen’s attitude towards the cock entirely
changed. She would sit inert for much of the time, as if entirely oblivious
of him and his antics. However — although she looked as if she was just
about to doze off — any slight movement or sound proceeding from a
source other than the male would immediately alert her into her normal

wide-awake self. Many of the early days were spent by both sexes
pushing the culmen, like a child with a sledge, along the top of the box
(Fig. 2). This method of progression is especially interesting for I have
noticed that very young parrots similarly trundle their beaks along the
ground when they push themselves under the feathers of a brooding parent
bird. As soon as the male became more dominant he gave up this
subservient method of progression; but the hen used this as her normal
means of moving about the surface of the box until a few days before she
started to enter the nest. She would raise her head slightly with the back
horizontal and squeakily cawing, like a fledgling Rook, plead to be trod.
This I never saw him do. My impression was that he still remained
uncertain of himself when in too close contact with her. She first entered
the box in the last week of June and from then on spent much of each day

184 G. A. SMITH — NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS

mysteriously inside. The male had entered the box several times during
the first two weeks, long before the hen, and was never seen to do so
subsequently.

Once courtship had started the cock became an entirely different
animal. He “ walked tall ”, In the winter months she seemed to be
larger than he. Now the position was reversed. His head was extended
well off the shoulders and seemed bulkier. His early display took place in
the absence of the hen and consisted of marching (the steps more
pronounced than in normal walking) to and fro on the top of the box.
After every two or three steps he would give a jump in the air. So far as I
could see this was a silent display. When doing this promenading alone
he would break off and excitedly call to Starlings flying over as if he wished
to draw attention to himself and his nest box. When the hen ultimately
joined him (she was a few weeks more retarded reproductive wise than he)
he became oblivious of other birds. He fed the hen not by regurgitating
in the usual parrot-pumping head up and down manner, but instead the
head was swung round and round three or four times as if relying on
centrifugal force to get the bolus up. She would sit quite unmoved by these
gyrations and take the proferred food without any discernible movement on
her part. Both indulged, in the early part of courtship, in much displace¬
ment preening. Whereas she would attend to almost any part of her
person he mostly preened his upper chest which coincidently showed off
his broad cheek-stripes. This was distinct from the swaying part of later
stage courtship when he would sway the body slowly from side to side
turning the head to give her a broad lateral view of his cheeks and of the
contracting pupil of the eye. As well as this lateral swaying of the body
he also had a bowing display which usually terminated in him feeding
the hen. In this the head was bowed very low. The beak was then
raised off the ground, lifted quite high and then placed on the ground on
her opposite side.

Another pattern of courtship was for him to advance, swaying the body,
towards the hen — and as usual jumping every few steps — then when six or
seven inches away sidle round to take the next few steps crab wise and
finally to completely reverse and “ back-in ” next to the hen with the
last few steps. So that he stood slightly in front of and yet to one side of
her. Her beak lying on his back and her field of vision almost entirely
obstructed by his wonderful collar. They looked not unlike a couple
riding a tandem bicycle with him, unchivalrously, sitting in front. If she
moved away from him, and this slightly ludicrous coupling, he would
waddle after her, forgetfully omitting to jump and then back-in again.
He — and until I saw this I wondered at what use he had for his whip-long
tail — swished the tail from side to side, in wide arcs each time he changed
his direction and backed-in.

Although the hen spent long periods in the box until the end of July
she never laid.

G. A. SMITH — NOTES ON A PAIR OF LONGTAILED PARRAKEETS 1 85

Longtailed Parrakeets are far from rare in the wild. Yet, rather oddly
(for Singapore — a major bird market — lies practically at the centre of their
distribution) they are seldom imported. The few that do get brought in
seem, as is usual with Ringnecks and other “ Psittaculas ” to have a very
large disproportion of male birds. The pair that I have cannot be very
aberrant examples of hardiness for often acclimatised single cocks are
advertised for sale. So something other than a suspected intolerance
towards cold may be to blame for the recorded losses.

My impression would be that: ( a ) they require large amounts of
food — and will not eat if watched. Newly imported parrots, in my
opinion, often die of sheer starvation, even when in the midst of plenty.
(b) Psychological stress, they certainly shiver continually with fear when
they are kept close to disturbing factors — which is the usual lot of newly
captured birds, (c) Diet: whatever they do eat in the wild it almost
certainly is not fed to them in captivity. As they may partake of very few
forms of food once they do settle down this may predispose towards
deficiency disease. ( d, ) Parasitism. Most wild birds — parrots included,
harbour various “ worms ”. The stresses of captivity may tend to upset
the normal “ balance ” between host and parasite in favour of the latter.
The cock of my pair has, or had, microfilaria (larval bloodborne worms).
And popular belief has it that these birds die from a “ worm in the heart ”.
The worm probably lives in the peritoneal cavity or air sacs of the bird
“ pushing ’ ’ its infective larvae — microfilaria — into the blood. Thromboses
or “ clots ” of microfilaria may feasibly cause death through, say, Coronary
thrombosis; but the adult worm is not involved.

REFERENCES

Ali, S. and Ripley, S. D. 1969. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan.
Volume 3 : 176.

Rutgers, A. 1969. Birds of Asia : 105.

Tavistock, Marquis of and Delacour, J. 1927. Eclectus and other Parrots and
Parrakeets. Avicult. Mag., Ser. IV, 5; 17.

1 86 E. CALLEGARI — BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY OF THE EUROPEAN BEE-EATER

BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY OF THE EUROPEAN
BEE-EATER, THE CARMINE BEE-EATER, AND
OF A HYRBID BETWEEN THE TWO

By E. Callegari (Ravenna, Italy)

Some years ago, during a safari in East Africa, near Mombasa, I caught
an adult Carmine Bee-eater, Merops nubicus. This species is a lovely
carmine-red with blue-green on head, rump and upper tail-coverts. I took
it with me while on a visit to some national parks, and it arrived in Italy
all skin and bones, yet healthy enough to recover within a few days. It
proved to adapt itself to captivity so well that it displayed to a female of the
European Bee-eater, Merops apiaster, with which it shared an aviary.

Since then I have always been trying to obtain Carmine Bee-eaters, but
I had never been able to get any. After an unsuccessful journey to
Timbuctoo I went to the Uebi Scebeli, having been told of the existence
of a colony of these birds there. When I arrived at the banks of the river,
at the foot of the slope where the birds nested, four monitor lizards were
present ; and I was told by the guide that when he first arrived at the spot
one of the monitors was clinging to the slope with a nestling in its mouth.

I returned home with eight of these nestlings. They grew healthy and
strong, and as early as the month of January the males began to display to
the females. I hoped to breed them but was faced with the old problem of
how to provide a suitable artificial nest. Taking the advice of Mr. Peter
Scott, I went to Professor Otto Koenig in Vienna to copy the artificial nest
he used. By the time that both the aviary and the nest were ready the
birds had already laid their eggs from the perches. In that year only one
pair of European Bee-eaters succeeded in rearing two nestlings.

Things went better the following year. When Spring came the birds
began to display, make nests and lay eggs. There were fights, and several
of the eggs as well as a few day-old nestlings were thrown out of the nests,
but two pairs of Carmine Bee-eaters were able to hatch four nestlings in all.
What surprised me most was the nest of one pair of European Bee-eaters.
They were feeding two young in the nest but once these emerged I realised
that they were, in fact, two hybrids from a Carmine Bee-eater and a
European Bee-eater. They look beautiful, and what is strange is that they
have a pink chin and throat and a thin blue-grey collar between throat and
breast.

When I sent the above information to the Avi cultural Magazine I
was asked if I would give further details of the feeding of the birds and the
making of the nest. I willingly describe all this and I hope it will be clear.

First of all you must bear in mind that Bee-eaters do not drink. For
this reason the birds must retain the water from the food which they eat,
and therefore the insects which you give them must not be dehydrated.

Avicult. Mag.

Artificial Nest-site for Bee-Eaters

E. CALLEGARI — BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY OF THE EUROPEAN BEE-EATER 1 87

Another point of great importance is that they need frequent changes
in the kind of insects given. To make this point clearer I want to quote
what I wrote several years ago with reference to the feeding of three
White-fronted Bee-eaters kept in captivity. “ They seemed to prefer
every new insect which I gave them.” If my statement is not absolutely
accurate it does, however, indicate the birds’ preference for variety in the
matter of food. They readily accept a vast range of the harder chitinous
insects in varying quantities; but refuse the softer insects such as cater¬
pillars, wasp-larvae and larvae of lamellicorn and longicorn beetles.
According to the insects available, I feed my group of European, Caimine
and White-fronted Bee-eaters on a mixture of 60% mealworms, 20% bees,
and the remaining 20% of wasps, hornets, cockchafers, rose-beetles, flies,
cockroaches, fresh-water shrimps, grasshoppers, dragonflies, butterflies,
big ants, cicadas, etc.

Of course it was much easier to find more varied and numerous insects
some fifteen years ago, when I made the first mixtures for three European
Bee-eaters. Today I have a wider experience in collecting these insects,
but it is more difficult to find them; for a lot of these species have almost
disappeared. While once I could collect these insects in the neighbourhood
of Ravenna, I now must go many kilometers from the town to be able to
find some. I keep the insects in cold store and feed the refrigerated insects
to the birds, with the exception of the meal worms, which I supply alive.
This is fed to the species already mentioned, but another group consisting
of Little Bee-eaters and Cinnamon-chested Bee-eaters get only 4% of
bees, with no fresh-water shrimps at all.

This was the most satisfactory way I could find of feeding these birds
and keeping them alive and healthy without giving them an excess of any
particular kind of insect. I am sure, however, that they would eat meal¬
worms in greater quantities and for longer periods; but fear they might
ultimately get tired of them. They enjoy spiders, scorpions, scolopenders
and small lizards too. They eat small quantities of cut lettuce as well,
and during the moult they even swallow a few feathers. They can tell their
prey by sight as well as taste. Thus they catch all the flying insects which
happen to get into the aviary, crying out with excitement for the insects
they mainly enjoy and discarding rather disgustedly those they do not
like — Arctiidae, Tenthredinidae, Chrysomelidae, Coccinellidae, Can-
tharidae, Lampyridae, Metoecus , etc. I am surprised to observe that they
will accept a very small percentage of both Zygaenidae and Lytta
•vescicatoria.

The artificial nest is made of a wooden box filled with a mixture of earth
and sand until compact. You must place it in the sunniest spot you can
find. Remove one or two boards on the side you deem more suitable for
the digging of the nests (see plate). In doing this the soil will be left
exposed, and in this the birds may dig their holes without any danger of
landslips.

i88

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE BLUE-CROWNED MOTMOT

If you provide the birds with adequate heating during the winter months,
and feed them as described above, the birds will survive well with only a
slight death-rate. But even here you may come across the disappointments
well known to all aviculturists. Last year, in fact, I lost the mother and
one daughter of the Carmine Bee-eaters, and two specimens of the young
European Bee-eaters, one of which had nearly developed a ruby-red iris.
I believe that this is the first time that the Carmine Bee-eater has been
kept in captivity, the first time that it has been bred, and the first time that
hybrids have been obtained in this family.

# * #

BREEDING THE BLUE-CROWNED MOTMOT
AT THE WINGED WORLD

( Momotus momota)

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

A pair of Blue-crowned Motmots, belonging to Bill Ranson, a member of
our staff, has been housed at the Winged World since 1966. On several
occasions they tunnelled into the earth floor of the aviaries we have
exhibited them in. Normally these tunnels have been used for roosting in,
although on at least two occasions last year we optimistically hoped for
youngsters as the adults were observed taking food into the tunnel.
On each occasion however they stopped after a few days. Eventually
they were housed in one of our largest glass-fronted compartments
together with many Thrushes, Starlings, Wood Hoopoes, Bulbuls, Orioles,
Barbets, a Cock of the Rock and a Ground Cuckoo. The competition
for live food can be imagined and it is a wonder they managed to co-
mandeer sufficient to rear their young when they finally bred sucessfully.

Their earlier breeding attempts were no doubt thwarted by the collapse
of their tunnels, as they burrowed diagonally into almost level soil, and
then levelled out into their nest cavity. Consequently there was a not
great deal of soil over their tunnels, and it was loose, due to being hoed
daily. I am certain that they were finally successful because they tun¬
nelled beneath a large concrete pool, which incidentally later broke its
back as a consequence. No cave-ins were experienced as the bottom of
the pool obviously acted as a roof for their tunnel and nest cavity, and the
surrounding damp soil no doubt aided egg incubation also.

We have no idea how long the incubation period was, as the adults were
extremely secretive in their movements. There was no doubt however
about their many visits to the tunnel with live food, which commenced
of April 13th. Maggots were left in the aviary ad lib , to the delight of
the other birds. Competition was also keen for the mealworms, crickets,
locusts, young mice and earthworms which were thrown to the Motmots
repeatedly throughout the day. Ten days later the calls of the youngsters
could be quite clearly heard some yards away. Strips of meat supple-

Avicult. Mag

Young Blue-crowned Motmot, two days after leaving the nest-tunnel at the Winged World.

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE THAILAND HOOPOE

189

mented the live food from 14 days onwards, and after a nestling period
of exactly 28 days one youngster appeared on 12th May. A second
nestling left the tunnel two days later. In between the appearance of the
nestlings the parents were observed mating again.

We were amazed at the size of the young Motmots, which were as
large as the adults. They had short tails of course, but resembled the
adults in colour also, although they lacked the breast spot.

Within one week of leaving the tunnel both youngsters were observed
feeding themselves, and three weeks later their tails were as long as their
parents’, although not raquet-tipped. By this time the adults had young
in the nest again.

* # *

As described above the Blue-crowned Motmot, Momotus momota has
been bred at the Winged World. It is believed this may be a first success,
any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species in
Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

* # #

BREEDING THE THAILAND HOOPOE
AT THE WINGED WORLD

( Upupa epops longirostris)

By Clive Roots (Heysham, Lancs., England)

Our pair of Thailand Hoopoes, purchased in 1966, produced infertile
eggs on many occasions, so we eagerly took the opportunity last year to
acquire four hand-reared youngsters. The original hen mated with one
of these birds and fertile eggs were laid early this year. Before this
happened however her behaviour was peculiar to say the least. For many
weeks she spent practically all day in the nest box and it was a rare
occurence to see her at all. The nest-box was suspended from the highest
point of their indoor aviary, which was shared with a group of Carmine
Bee-eaters, a breeding pair of Brown- throated Barbets, Minivets, Sunbirds
and several other species. The male Hoopoe fed her untiringly and we
occasionally checked to see if eggs had been laid. After two months,
and no eggs, we were naturally concerned that such a steady, established
bird should hide away for so long. The nest inspections became less
frequent, and we eventually decided to fill the box with rotten wood to
keep the hen out for a while and provide her with much-needed exercise
if she really did intend to lay. A last minute check however revealed that
she had a nestful of healthy fledglings, apparently about two days old.
Egg laying and incubation had occurred since our last check, just over
three weeks previously, so we cannot provide any information on the
incubation period of these birds. The male Hoopoe continued to feed
the hen and nestlings for several days before she emerged to assist him.
s

190

CLIVE ROOTS — BREEDING THE THAILAND HOOPOE

Maggots and earthworms were preferred, which eased the live food
situation as there was a great deal of competition from the Bee-eaters
for mealworms.

Two fledglings were seen at the entrance of the box twenty days after
we assumed they had hatched, but not until five days later did the first
one venture out, followed after two days by the other. The next day
two more youngsters appeared. They were exact replicas of the adults,
except for their shorter bills. Within three weeks however these were
equally as long as their parents’ beaks and had it not been for the latter’s leg
rings it would have been difficult to indentify them. These young Hoopoes
were splendid birds. Their feathering was perfect, their bills strong and
their legs and feet well developed. They were by far the finest youngsters
of any species reared at the Winged World. The adults were seen
mating while their young were still in the box, and they have nested again.

Our success with insectivorous birds is naturally attributed primarily
to the provision of a suitable high protein diet. The Thailand Hoopoes,
like all the other insect eaters, receive the standard softbill fare comprising
our own insectile mixture with raw minced beef. A fresh mixture with
finely diced apple replacing the meat is given late in the afternoon and
is left in overnight. A few maggots daily, and mealworms occasionally,
complete their basic diet. This is supplemented however by the earth¬
worms, crickets and the not-so-welcome cockroaches which are now
thriving in their aviary, and they are continually probing the earth floor
and crevices for these and other invertebrates.

# * *

The breeding of the Thailand Hoopoe brings to five the number of
species of the order Coraciiformes which have reproduced at the Winged
World in the past twelve months.

C. J. O. HARRISON — SUBSPECIES AND AVICULTURE I9I

SUBSPECIES AND AVICULTURE: SOME NOTES
ON RECENT DIFFICULTIES

By C. J. O. Harrison (Perivale, Middlesex, England)

There is usually little reason for aviculturists to bother about subspecies,
or races as they are sometimes called, of the different species of birds.
They are likely to pay little attention to them unless two forms that were
regarded as species are combined as two subspecies within a single species.
In some cases, particularly where populations of a single species are
separated on islands the populations may be very different in appearance.
In such instances there has been a feeling that separate awards should be
made for first breedings of birds from these distinct populations. This
has been done in the past by the Avicultural Society for subspecies of
some parrots; but since this has recently led to doubts being expressed
concerning the subspecific indentity of such birds, it seems necessary to
try to explain the difficulties involved where named subspecies are con¬
cerned.

The naming of subspecies began mainly at the beginning of this century.
It was intended for the use of museum systematists and many of the
differences involved between subspecies are so slight that they are only
useful if the user has a series of skins of birds from both populations in
front of him when he is considering them. Many of the differences are
those of populations, not of all individuals. Names were given not only
to separate populations such as those on islands, but also to various local
parts of continuous populations of widely distributed species. Names
were often given after an examination of only one or two individuals
from widely separated localities and further collecting may often have
revealed that such subspecies intergrade with no definite division between
them.

In addition it has been the practice to assign names to populations
when 75% of one sample differ in a particular character from all of the
other sample; but this also means that one in four of a named subspecies
might be indistinguishable from the next subspecies. The characters
that separate subspecies may be very fine distinctions in colour, shape,
or size sometimes only distinguishable in certain plumages and one sex.
Since overall measurements cannot be taken from a stuffed skin, parts
such as the bill, tarsus, wings, and tail are measured. Variation in the
size of such parts may not mirror overall changes in size. In some
instances the critical size differences separating the range of measurements
identifying different subspecies may be as little as a millimeter.

These named subspecies were intended for use in discussing the
variations apparent in samples of populations available as museum
specimens. In 1949 Bernard Tucker pointed out that in the majority of
cases subspecies were not relevant to field studies of live birds, and
discontinued the general use of subspecific names in the journal “ British

192

C. J. O. HARRISON — SUBSPECIES AND AVICULTURE

Birds ”. We should recognise that such subdivisions are not usually
relevant in aviculture either; and that an individual bird, or pair, for which
the precise locality of origin is unknown cannot be confidently assigned
to a subspecies unless the latter is one in which all individuals are strikingly
different from all other individuals in other subspecies of the species
concerned.

The attempt to apply these subdivisions to live birds in aviaries has
led to some difficulties. A Swedish member of the society, Mr. T. R. M.
Brosset, who is very interested in Parrots, visited the aviaries of a number
of British aviculturists and in doing so formed the opinion that a number
of birds had been wrongly attributed to particular subspecies. He sent
me some excellent colour transparencies of the birds concerned, together
with tentative identifications, and encouraged me to take a further look
at the matter. The two principal species involved are the Eclectus
Parrot, Eclectus roratus , and the Lorikeet, Trichoglossus haematodus.

The Eclectus Parrot illustrates the problem very well. There are
eleven named geographical subspecies. Only about five of these can
normally be identified by the amateur, and two of these intergrade.
The males of all are very similar. In E. r. pectoralis, the female is red,
maroon above, and dark blue on the breast. The male usually shows a
little yellow on the tail tip. Individuals of the subspecies biaki, aruensis,
macgillwrayi , goodsoni , solomonensis, and major ensis cannot be distinguished
from pectoralis for ordinary avicultural purposes. This group inhabits
the area from New Guinea to the Solomons and Northern Australia.
The birds originally described as Ceram eclectus , the breeding of which
was described in an earlier number of the Avicultural Magazine,
appear, in fact, to have belonged to this group.

E. r. vosmaeri of the Northern Moluccas, and E. r. roratus of the Southern
Moluccas have violet on the upper mantle, neck and underside of the
females. On the former the underside of the female tail and under-tail
coverts may be yellow, while on the latter only the tail tip is normally
yellow, but this character is variable and the two intergrade. E. r. Cornelia
of Sumba and E. r. riedeli of Tenimber both lack blue on the neck, breast
and belly of the female, and the second has about an inch of yellow on
the underside of the tail while the first has virtually none.

The picture is more complex in the case of the Lorikeet. It was
analysed by Cain (1955). The New Guinea region is inhabited by a
group of subspecies centred around Trichoglossus h. haematodus. These
birds have a red breast barred with black, a tendency towards black on
the belly, a greenish-yellow collar, blue on the head and brown on the
nape. These characters may vary independently within the population
formed by this group. Birds tend to be more heavily barred in the west,
bluer-headed and blacker below in the south, and so on. Various parts
of this population showing various combinations of these characters have
been given the names berauensis , intermedius,flavicans , massena, micropteryx ,

C. J. O. HARRISON — SUBSPECIES AND AVICULTURE

*93

nesophilus , deplanchii, caeruleiceps , and nigrogularis. The variations are
not absolutely clear-cut and unless a bird can be compared with an
extensive range of museum skins it would seem inadvisable or impossible
to assign one of these names to it, and even then the identification would
not be certain, and I would suggest that for avicultural purposes these
forms are best regarded as a single population.

A form with a plain red breast occurs on Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa and
Djampea, and has the names forsteni , mitchellii and djampeanus. A
greenish or yellow-breasted form occurs on the Lesser Sundas and has
the names capistratus, fortis, flavotectus and weberi; and between the two
stresemanni on Kalao tua is intermediate in its characters.

The Australian group have bluer heads and unbarred breasts with
more orange and yellow mixed with the red; the other plain-breasted
forms having dark heads. T. h. moluccanus and septentrionalis have
greenish collars, rubitorquis has a reddish collar.

In addition to the above there is one individual form. T. h. rosenbergii
of Biak is like the first group but has very heavy blue-black breast bars,
more extensive red on flanks and wings and a very large yellow collar.

The general picture within this group is therefore like that of the Eclectus
Parrot, but in this case only six groups can be recognised with 22 names.
Some idea of the difficulties that might be involved in identifying odd
birds of the first group can be gained from the following comments.
When Mr. Brosset sent his colour transparencies, D. T. Holyoak and I
examined them independently in comparison with material in the collection
of the British Museum (Natural History). A pair of Lorikeets at Chester
Zoo had been described as the Louisade Lorikeet, T. h. aberrans. Brosset
pointed out that aberrans was now a synonym of flavicans and since the
bird was not yellowish suggested that it might be T. h. micropteryx , or
massena or intermedins. Holyoak agreed they might be any of these, or
possibly caeruleiceps or deplanchii , and I was not sure that nigrofularis
could be ruled out. The birds which bred at Kelling Pines had been
described as the Blue-headed Lorikeet, T. h. caeruleicaps. Brosset
thought that they were haematodus but was not wholly sure. Holyoak
suggested caeruleiceps or nigrogularis, but felt certain that many of the
other forms listed above could not be completely ruled out. My own
view was that haematodus was a possibility but that caeruleiceps could not
be entirely dismissed.

In view of this I would repeat my opinion that as far as records and
awards for breeding are concerned it would be better to recognise the
larger and more distinct natural groups and not to assume that every name
must separate a distinct and identifiable population of individuals which
are recognisable even when the precise locality of origin is not known.
I think too that zoological gardens and public collections should display
more caution in using subspecific names, and also that we should
recognise that dealers often have access only to rather limited sources

194 C. J- O. HARRISON — THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE KANSU BABBLER

of information and may be a little incautious in their identifications.

REFERENCES

Cain, A. J. 1955. A revision of Trichoglossus haematodus and of the Australian
Platycercine parrots. Ibis, 97 : 432-479.

Tucker, B. W. i 949. Species and subspecies : a review for general ornithologists.
British Birds, 42 : 1 29-1 34, 161-174, 193-205.

* * *

THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE KANSU
BABBLER AND GREY-HEADED BABBLER

By C. J. O. Harrison (Perivale, Middlesex, England).

While reading an account of the breeding of one of these species by
A. H. Isenberg I had occasion to examine some museum skins and came
to the conclusion that most, perhaps all, the birds which have in recent
years appeared in collections of live birds as the Kansu Babbler, Garrulax
sukatschewi, are in fact individuals of the Grey-headed Babbler, G.
cineraceus.

The last has a resemblance to the Rufous-chinned Babbler, G. rufogularis ,
to which it is closely related, but lacks the elaborate pattern. It is mainly
a warm slightly rufous buff, with a vinous tint on breast and throat,
and orange-buff on tail coverts and hind-flanks. The crown of the head
is dark grey-black, there is a white spot on the lores between eye and bill
and the white continues under the eye to another small patch just below
and behind the eye. The ear-coverts are rufous. The lower edge of the
ear-coveits has an irregular blackish stripe breaking down into spots.
The bill is fairly stout. The edges of primary wing feathers are ash-grey,
greater primary coverts are black, and tertials and secondaries on the
closed wing are warm buff with a broad black band at the end and a
narrow white bar across the squarish tip. The central tail feathers are
similar with a broad black band, narrow white terminal bar and square
tips.

The Kansu Babbler has very subdued colouring and lacks black on
wings and tail. It is soft vinous pink below and mainly pinkish grey on
mantle and head. The lores are dark with a dull blackish line through
the eye, another bordering the lower edge of the ear-coverts, and the
entire ear-coverts are white. The bill is more slender, tapering and very
slightly decurved. Primary feather edges are ash-grey, and tertials
and secondaries olive, the tertials having rounded terminal white spots,
the secondaries tiny triangular white tips. The central tail feathers are
olive brown with faint greyish fringes and tip. The tail is relatively long
and the tips of feathers taper a little. Tail coverts and flanks are light
orange-buff. This would appear to be a rare species of limited distribu¬
tion. The Grey-headed Babbler has a wider distribution from Assam,
through northern Burma to adjacent parts of China.

YUKIO NAKATA — AN EXPEDITION TO ALASKA

*95

AN EXPEDITION TO ALASKA IN SEARCH OF
GROUSE AND PTARMIGAN
AND ON THE WAY BACK A VISIT TO THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF AMERICA

By Yukio Nakata (Osaka, Japan)

The grouse and ptarmigan occur as 1 1 different species on the Eurasian
Continent, and seven in North America. They are almost circumpolar,
but their total number is gradually decreasing.

The dispatch of a group to Alaska for the purpose of taking some of
them for breeding in captivity was proposed by an American named
Mr. Ray Carr of the Western Game Breeder’s Society, U.S.A. The
present writer had the pleasure of joining the group.

The American members participating were unanimous in welcoming
the opportunity as a rare chance probably never to be enjoyed again in
their lifetime. This feeling was shared equally by me, and I found the
visit to Alaska to be the most rewarding and memorable experience.

Alaska is the most beautiful region in the entire North America. Its
southern part, when the group visited it, was in the midst of autumn, and
the long lines of birches with their leaves turned yellow, were seen literally
forming an endless vista. Actually, they extended over a distance of
1,000 km., dotted at places by glacier ice falls, beautiful placid lakes and
rivulets, each suggesting the most attractive spots for camping or angling.

Moreover, volcanoes Iliamna and Redoubt, and Mt. Spurr, all 3,000 m.
high, were snow-capped, towering high and majestic in the sky; while
Mt. McKinley, towering over 6,000 m. high, is said to be the highest
mountain in North America. It is now a National Park.

During the present expedition, I drove by car over a distance of about
3,000 km. To me, the visit to Alaska seemed to have been a visit to a
giant natural zoo. On both sides of the road on which I drove along, a
variety of such wild animals, big and small, as moose, caribous, brown
bears, foxes, coyotes, porcupines, marmots, squirrels, grouse and ptarmigan
came out to greet me. At times, they were seen crossing the road in
front of my car. Almost at 10 min. intervals, as the car sped along, the
carcases of porcupines were found left lying on the ground, suggesting
that they had had the misfortune of being collided with or run over by
cars because of the very slow speed at which they could run.

In the shoals of the limpid rivulets, groups of crimson salmon were
seen swimming up against the stream.

On the mid-slopes of the mountains sloping steeply high up into the
sky abruptly from the roadside were seen dots of white, which, on the
closer examination through a telescope, were found to be the mountain
sheep. Their existence so high up struck the writer as something
extremely mystic.

In the sky, I saw many V-shaped formations of wild geese in flight.

196

YUKIO NAKATA — AN EXPEDITION TO ALASKA

The brief descriptions above will suffice to give a rough idea of Alaska’s
natural scenery.

Once you step into such modern cities as Anchorage or Fairbanks a
totally different picture is presented, for here the fruits of human civiliza¬
tion glitter. The hotels are brilliant, both inside and outside, and to
dine in the dining-room of a gorgeous hotel leaves an impression of great
luxury. But as a matter of fact our accommodation during travel through
Alaska consisted entirely of bivouacs, using eiderdowns and sleeping bags.

When I reached Alaska it was just September. In the southern part of
Alaska, the temperature then was 7°C at the lowest, and i8°C at the highest,
while, in the central part, it dropped to — 4°C at the lowest and it rose
just to 5-6 °C even at the highest.

The biting polar cold had not yet set in, but the present writer was
told that, on a certain day, Fairbanks recorded as low a temperature as
54 °C below zero!

In the central part of Alaska, the visitor will see more snow-capped and
sharp-tapered peaks, and more spruces than birches. The number of
tall trees will decrease; in the Eagle Creek Ptarmigan Research Area, a
whole expanse of Tundra will greet him. There will now be no tall tree
to be seen there. The whole view is nothing but a vast expanse of
Tundra or wildly sloping hills with bushes, dotted with left over snow.

The grouse and ptarmigan are captured when they are on the ground
by means of a hand net, a mist net or a copper wire loop ; while, when they
are perched on twigs, the use of a loop formed into a noose, made of a
thick vinyl thread, fixed at the tip of a telescopic and long angling rod
(over 5 m. in length), placed over the neck and shoulder of a grouse or
ptarmigan, was found highly effective.

At times, the cry of a baby grouse or ptarmigan may be mimicked to
attract its parents; when they come sufficiently near they may be caught
with a hand net.

On the Kenai Peninsula in the south, the grouse were captured under
the guidance of Dr. Larry Ellison, who has for several years been engaged
in the research of the spruce grouse, living in a cabin erected especially
for the purpose deep in the forests of Sterling H.W. But for his guidance,
indeed, it would have been utterly out of question to capture grouse in
these forests, which are so thick and dense that in winter it would be
impossible to get out of them without help.

Dr. Ellison is an official researcher attached to the Alaskan Department
of Fish and Game who obtained his degree for his study of grouse, and
he was good enough to present me with a copy of his four-part treatise,
which was of tremendous interest.

I had the pleasure of staying at his cabin over two nights. It was not
supplied with electricity. Cooking was by propane gas and lighting was
provided from the same source. Water had to be drawn from East
Finger Lake, 100 m. distant, and the mountain wood had to be cut by

Avicult. Mag,

Willow-Ptarmigan at Mrs. Kubek’s Farm.

YUKIO NAKATA — AN EXPEDITION TO ALASKA

1 97

means of a saw operated by petroleum as fuel for heating.

Normally Dr. Ellison would be engrossed in study, all alone in the
forests, but accompanied by two dogs, white and black.

In the central part of Fairbanks I had an opportunity of calling at
Alaska University, where I was taken to its research laboratory, and at the
breeding area outside the campus I inspected the reindeer, brown bears,
foxes, willow ptarmigan, etc. Many willow ptarmigan had already grown
to the size of adult birds. The rearing room was divided into two, the
one virtually being an ultra-red ray lamp-lighted warm room while the
other was a wire-floored pen with no shelter. Thy were fed with Purina
pellets. Apparently, no complicated feeds were given.

In connection with this visit the present writer feels himself much
indebted to another authority on the study of ptarmigan — Dr. Robert
Weeden, for his thoroughgoing encouragement and assistance; and also
to Dr. Ellison and Mr. and Mrs. J. Kubek for generous assistance and
advice.

After travelling through Alaska for ten days I boarded a plane from
Anchorage to San Francisco, then flew to Utah in order to attend the
annual convention of the American Game-Bird breeders Cooperative
Federation, which was to be held at Salt Lake City.

At San Francisco I was welcomed very kindly by Mr. Ronald Reuther,
the Director, and had the pleasure of making a round trip of the spacious
zoo ground with Mr. C. Rawlins of the London Zoo, who was also on a
visit.

I was greatly impressed by the beautiful sight of the zoo, which had
lovely plantations and green lawns, dotted with yellow and red flowers.
It was far more beautiful than its counterparts in Japan.

The San Diego zoo, which I had visited last fall, was extremely spacious,
where natural environments with gorges, etc., especially designed and
well suited for wild animals to live in, were most impressive, and I was
struck, in particular, at the sight of numberless galapagos tortoises,
iguanas, humming birds, and the large collection of reptiles kept there.
On the occasion of my visit to this zoo, I was a grateful recipient of the
kindest hospitality provided by Kenton Lint, the Curator of Birds.

Among other game-bird breeders, I met Fitzsimmons-Denton who has
the most elaborate and scientific facilities for breeding of birds, and
appeared to be especially proud of such rare birds as Peacock Pheasants,
Jungle-fowls, etc., which he owned. In particular, I noted with much
interest such Japanese species as Ijima Copper Pheasants and long-tailed
fowls kept there in quite a large number.

I was able to attend an annual meeting of the American Game-Bird
Breeders Cooperative Federation, where the speakers included Wesley
Batterson, lecturing on the “ Propagation of Waterfowl and Grouse ”,
Prof. Allen Stokes on the “ Behaviour Studies of Various Gallinaceous
Birds ”, and Glen Christensen on “ Breeding the Himalayan Snow

198 A. A. PRESTWICH — EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS

Partridge and the Crested Tinamou ”, all of which I found exceedingly
interesting and instructive.

I

* * *

EXTINCT, VANISHING, AND HYPOTHETICAL

PARROTS

By A. A. Prestwich (Edenbridge, Kent, England)

Since 1600, the date accepted by the Survival Service Commission,
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources,
as the reckoning date for modern extinction, 167 species of birds have
certainly become extinct, and at least 340 are considered to be endangered
species. Needless to say, a number of parrot species are included in
both groups.

Some species have vanished, or are vanishing, through natural causes, 1
but man is responsible for the status of the great majority — destruction of
habitat by cultivation, felling of forests, draining of swamps, shooting and
trapping, and persecution by introduced predators.

An attempt has been made to list all the parrot species that are now
certainly extinct. Just a few “ probables ” are included. It is not known
for certain that they are extinct but it is feared so. It is to be hoped that
they have vanished only temporarily.

EXTINCT

Norfolk Island, Philip Island, or Long-billed Parrot.

Nestor productus (Gould), 1836. Norfolk and Philip Islands, Western
Pacific.

While the other Nestor spp. are on the verge of extinction it is believed
that this is the only one that is definitely extinct. The last specimen is
said to have died in a cage in London, sometime after 1851. It was a
large bird, total length about 15 in., somewhat like the Kaka Nestor
meridionalis , but with a yellow breast. There are specimens in 14
museums.

New Caledonian Diademed Lorikeet.

Charmosyna diadema (J. Verreaux and Des Murs), i860. New Cale¬
donia, West Pacific.

Only the type, a female, is known to exist. It is believed to have been
collected before i860, and it is now preserved in the Musee Nationale
d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris.

A. A. PRESTWICH - EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS 1 99

Mauritian Broad-billed or Crested Parrot.

Lophopsittacus mauritianus (Owen), 1866. Mauritius, Indian Ocean.

In the Library of Utrecht there is a manuscript journal kept during
the voyage to Mauritius of Wolphart Harmanszoon, 1601-1602, in which
there is a sketch of this parrot. Sir Thomas Herbert sketched this large,
probably flightless, blue-grey parrot, with its enormous bill and distinct
crest, in 1638. Otherwise it is known only by rather unsatisfactory
accounts of travellers, and bones preserved in London, Tring, Cambridge
and Mauritius museums.

Cuban Red or Tri-coloured Macaw.

Ara tricolor Bechstein, 1811. Cuba and Isle of Pines, West Indies.

This was a comparatively small macaw, length about 18 in., pre¬
dominantly red and yellow. It is believed that a few birds were still
living until about 1885, but the last-recorded specimen was one shot at
La Vega, near Cienaga de Zapata, on the south coast, in 1864. There
are 15 skins in 11 museums.

St. Croix Macaw.

Ara autochthones Wetmore, 1937. St. Croix, Virgin Islands, West
Indies.

Known only from osseous remains. Nothing appears to have been
recorded concerning this rather primitive macaw.

Mauge’s Conure.

Aratinga chloroptera maugei (Souance), 1856. Puerto Rico and Mona
Island, West Indies.

This conure differs from all allied principally in having the whole of
the under wing-coverts red. The last specimen was taken on Mona
Island, by W. W. Brown, a collector, in 1892. Only three specimens are
known to exist, in Paris, Leyden and Chicago.

Carolina Parrakeet.

Conuropsis carolinensis carolinensis (Linnaeus), 1758. South-eastern
United States of America, from southern Virginia to Florida.

This parrakeet was bred in captivity on several occasions: first by Dr.
Karl Russ in Germany, in 1879. The greatest success was obtained in
the Cincinnati Zoological Garden, where the last known example died in
September, 1914. There are specimens in most of the principal
museums.

Louisiana Parrakeet.

Conuropsis carolinensis ludovicianus (Gmelin), 1788. Central United
States of America.

Differed from the preceding by being somewhat paler generally. The
date of extinction is doubtful. Three of a flock of 11 were shot in
Louisiana, in 1881; one was reported shot in Kansas, 1904; and one is
said to have been seen in Jackson County, Missouri, in 1912 (possibly
an escaped cage bird). No museum specimens have been recorded.

200 A. A. PRESTWICH — EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS

Nebraska Parrakeet.

Conuropsis fratercula Wetmore, 1926. Nebraska, United States of
America.

A “ little brother ” of the Carolina Parrakeet. Known only from a
fossil humerus found in Snake Creek Quarries, Sioux County, Nebraska.

CULEBRA AmAZONA PARROT.

Amazona vittata graciliceps Ridgway, 1915. Culebra Island, West
Indies.

Described as smaller than the Red-fronted or Puerto Rico Amazona
Parrot Amazona vittata vittata. None has been found since 1899. Only
three specimens are preserved: they are in the United States National
Museum.

Reunion or Mascarene Parrot.

Mascarinus mascarinus (Linnaeus), 1771. Island of Reunion, Indian
Ocean.

Pere du Bois described this parrot very accurately in 1674. In 1834
Carl Hahn figured an example then living in the Menagerie of the King
of Bavaria. Unfortunately all trace of this bird, probably the last of its
kind, was lost. Only two specimens have been preserved, in the
Museums of Paris and Vienna.

Rodriguez Parrot.

Necropsittacus rodericanus (Milne-Edwards), 1867. Rodriguez, Indian
Ocean.

Known from bones and the description of an anonymous, contemporary
observer. Last seen about 1760. It was apparently approximately the
size of a large cockatoo, completely uniform green, with a huge bilk
The bones are at Cambridge.

Seychelles Alexandrine Parrakeet.

Psittacula eupatria wardi (E. Newton), 1867. Seychelles, Indian
Ocean.

Still present in 1870, when a few skins were collected for Cambridge
University, but there is no later record. This race differs from the
Ceylon P. e. eupatria and allies in wanting the rose collar. There are
skins in only five museums — Cambridge, England; Cambridge, Mass.;
London; Paris; and New York.

Mauritian Ring-necked Parrakeet.

Psittacula krameri echo (A. and E. Newton), 1876. Mauritius, Indian
Ocean.

Now very scarce, even if not actually extinct. Last sighted in April,
1911, when Colonel R. Meinertzhagen saw an adult pair. Differs from
the Ring-necked of Africa and India in being larger, darker green in colour,
and in having broader tail-feathers.

A. A. PRESTWICH — EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS 201

Reunion Ring-necked Parrakeet.

Psittacula krameri eques (Boddaert), 1783. Island of Reunion, Indian
Ocean.

Known only from Daubenton’s plate, 1783, and from a statement by
Pere Dubois that he saw them, about 1670. How it may have differed
from echo of Mauritius is not known.

Exiled or Rodriguez Ring-necked Parrakeet.

Psittacula exsul (A. Newton), 1872. Rodriguez, Indian Ocean.

No information has been forthcoming since 1875, when an immature
male was killed by Vandorous, on 14th August. It must be considered
extinct. It was a medium-sized parrakeet, total length 16 in., of a pale
greyish-glaucous colour. Only two specimens are known, both in
Cambridge.

Cebu or Golden-backed Hanging Parrot.

Loriculus philippensis chrysonotus Sclater, 1872. Cebu, Philippine
Islands.

This hanging parrot was gradually exterminated by the destruction of
forests on Cebu, about 1906.

Paradise or Gould’s Beautiful Parrakeet.

Psephotus pulcherrimus (Gould), 1845. South-eastern Queensland to
northern New South Wales, Australia.

At one time believed to be extinct it was rediscovered by C. H. Jerrard,
in 1921. The following year he photographed a pair at the nest. The
last authentic sighting appears to be that of Jerrard on 14th November
1927. There is little evidence to suggest that it still exists.

Lord Howe Island Green Parrakeet.

Cyanorhamphus novaezelandiae subflavescens Salvadori, 1891. Lord
Howe Island, South-west Pacific.

The last pair was seen by a Mr. Hall, in 1869. This subspecies was
about the size of the Norfolk Island Parrakeet C. n. cookii , and rather
like it in colour, but of a more yellowish tinge. There are specimens in
London, but no others have been recorded. There are fortunately still
seven races of C. novaezelandiae living, although several are very reduced
in number.

Macquarie Island Red-fronted Parrakeet.

Cyanorhamphus novaezelandiae erythrotis (Wagler), 1832. Macquarie
Island, south-east of Tasmania.

The last examples were seen about 1913. This subspecies was larger
and paler than the New Zealand Red-fronted C. n. novaezelandiae. There
are specimens in London. As there are no trees on Macquarie Island
this parrakeet nested amongst tussocks on the ground, and so was an easy
victim to abandoned house cats, etc.

Tahiti Parrakeet.

Cyanoramphus zealandicus (Latham), 1790. Tahiti, French Oceania.

This Tahitian species disappeared about the middle of the nineteenth

202 A. A. PRESTWICH — EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS

century. The last authentic specimen was taken in 1844 by Lieutenant
Marolles, and is now in Paris. Other specimens are in London and
Liverpool. The species differed mainly in that it had a brown-black
frontal band (crown green).

New Zealand Orange-fronted Parrakeet.

Cyanorhamphus malherbi Souance, 1857. Hen Island, Little Barrier
Island, South Island, New Zealand.

There have been only five reports during the past 80 years, most of
them unconfirmed. If not actually extinct it must be extremely rare.

Ulietea (now Raiatea) Island or Society Islands Parrakeet.

Cyanorhamphus ulietanus (Gmelin), 1788. Raiatea Island, Society
Islands, French Oceania.

This very distinct species, olive-brown with brown-red rump, is known
only from two specimens collected by G. R. Forster in 1773 or 1774,
during Captain Cook’s second voyage. There are skins in London and
Vienna.

Night Parrot.

Geopsittacus occidentals Gould, 1861. South and Western Australia.

Only one specimen has been collected this century but there have been
unconfirmed sightings as recent as i960. It must be considered a vanished
species. There are specimens in eight museums. Dr. Karl Russ is
credited with breeding this parrot in Germany, in 1877: but Dr. Russ
never made any claim to have done so. There must surely have been a
confusion of common names.

HYPOTHETICAL

The parrots listed as hypothetical are birds known only from the
descriptions of travellers and explorers of long ago. It must be remem¬
bered that the majority had little or no training as naturalists, con¬
sequently their descriptions leave much to be desired. They are some¬
times of the sketchiest and it is perhaps remarkable that since 1900
authors should have seen fit to bestow scientific names on about a dozen
supposed species or races, including seven macaws. It is, however, only
fair to say that they are listed merely as “ hearsay species ”.

Guadeloupe Violet Macaw.

Anodorhynchus (? Ara) purpurascens Rothschild, 1905. Guadeloupe,
French West Indies.

Don de Navaret, 1640, described a macaw of entirely deep violet.
Probably the description should not be taken too seriously.

Yellow-headed or Jamaican Red Macaw.

Ara gossei Rothschild, 1905. Jamaica, British West Indies.

Based on a macaw described by a Dr. Robinson who saw an incomplete,
stuffed specimen. It was said to have been shot, probably about 1765, by
Mr. Odell, about 10 miles east of Lucea. The specimen appears to
have been lost.

A. A. PRESTWICH— EXTINCT, VANISHING AND HYPOTHETICAL PARROTS 203

Jamaican Green and Yellow Macaw.

Ara erythrocephala Rothschild, 1905. Jamaica, British West Indies.

Based on poor hearsay evidence. It must have been extinct by early
in the nineteenth century.

Guadeloupe Red Macaw.

Ara guadeloupensis Clark, 1905. Guadeloupe, French West Indies.

Extinct since early eighteenth century (? 1722). Based on a good
description, but no specimen. It appears to have resembled the Red and
Yellow Macaw A. macao , but was smaller and the tail was all red.

Dominican Green and Yellow Macaw.

Ara atwoodi Clark, 1908. Dominica, British West Indies.

Based on a rather doubtful description by Thomas Atwood, published
in 1791.

Yellow and Blue or Martinique Macaw.

Ara martinica Rothschild, 1905. Martinique, West Indies.

Based solely on the unconfirmed description of Pere Bouton, published
in 1640.

Mysterious Macaw.

Ara erythrura Rothschild, 1907. “ One of the West Indian Islands ”.

Based on a description by De Rochefort, published in 1658.

Guadeloupe Conure.

Conurus labati Rothschild, 1905. Guadeloupe, French West Indies.

Based on the writings of J. B. Labat, 1722. It is said to have been
about the size of a Blackbird, entirely green except a few, small red
feathers on the head. No specimens exist.

Guadeloupe Parrot.

Psittacus violacea Gmelin, 1788. Guadeloupe, French West Indies.

Known by descriptions of naturalists and travellers — Du Tertre, 1667,
Labat, 1722. Probably extinct since early eighteenth century. No
specimens exist.

Martinique Parrot.

Amazona martinica Clark, 1905. Martinique, West Indies.

The only description is that of Labat, 1722. No later report. The
parrots of Guadeloupe and Martinique may possibly have been races of
the same species, or even the same species, as there is no indication of how
they differed.

Bourbon Parrot.

Necropsittacus borbonicus Rothschild, 1905. Island of Reunion,
Indian Ocean.

Known only from the short description of Pere Dubois, 1669: “ Body
the size of a large pigeon, green; head, tail and upper part of wings the
colour of fire ”.

204

DR. HEINZ-GEORG KLOS — BERLIN ZOO NEWS

Mauritian Parrot.

Necropsittacus francicus Rothschild, 1905. Mauritius, Indian Ocean.

Known only from the contemporary authors of Mauritius in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries: “ head and tail fiery red, rest of
body and wings green

In order to reduce duplication to the minimum the numerous references
are not given. The majority are to be found in the very extensive Biblio¬
graphy in James C. Greenway, Jr., Extinct and Vanishing Birds of the
World , 1958, to which anyone sufficiently interested should refer.

* *

#

BERLIN ZOO NEWS

By Dr. Heinz-Georg Klos

In 1966, we obtained a pair of Black-headed Ibises ( Threskiornis
melanocephala ) which successfully bred and raised two young in 1967
and three in 1968. At that time we put a pair of Straw-necked Ibises
( Threskiornis spinicollis ) into the same aviary with the result that very soon
the male Black-headed and the female Straw-necked Ibis formed a pair.
They have bred in 1969, and a hybrid was reared. In 1970, their first
two eggs were put into an incubator. After 28 days, the young hatched
and were raised artificially. At first they were fed with a mixture of
predigested fresh water fish, meat and chicken meal. Later on they got
small pieces of fish and meat, salad, cooked rice, and in addition calcium
and vitamins. This diet proved to be satisfactory because the young
developed very well and as rapidly as the two others which a little later
were raised by their parents.

All five hybrids are similar in coloration: they look very much like
Black-headed Ibises although their neck is covered with white feathers
and there is more black on the wings and back than in Threskiornis
melanocephala. Due to the good breeding results, our aviary has become
so overcrowded that we were forced to pinion all our young ibises. They
now live among geese and ducks on one of our lakes where they make a
beautiful exhibit.

P. J. S. OLNEY — LONDON ZOO NOTES

205

LONDON ZOO NOTES

By P. J. S. Olney

Since the last London Zoo Notes we have had a particularly active
period compounded of the usual hopes and frustrations, rearrangements,
exchanges and purchases.

Some of the more interesting adult arrivals have been Hooded
Mergansers, Scarlet Ibises, Bateleur Eagles, Mikado Pheasants, Allen’s
Gallinule, Pygmy Kingfishers, Wood Hoopoes, Striated Thrushes and
Thick-billed Weavers. A small collection of southeast Asian Pigeons
and Doves was presented and included four species or subspecies not
seen in the Gardens before; the Mountain Imperial Pigeon Ducula badia
badia and Ducula badia griseicapilla , the Little Cuckoo Dove Macropygia
ruficeps and the Little Green Pigeon Tver on olax.

There have been a number of notable deaths including a male Ne-ne,
female Golden Eagle, our adult male Princess Stephanie’s Bird of Paradise,
and the Naked- throated Bell Bird. The latter’s strident call will be
missed, especially as the bird had been in the collection for 18 years.
Fortunately we have managed to replace the Ne-ne and Golden Eagle,
though in both cases as yet there has been no obvious permanent pair
bonding.

Pursuing the policy of providing where possible mates for our birds,
we have obtained a number of prospective husbands or wives. These
have included a Chough, Little Owl, and a number of ducks and geese.

It is too early to say how successful this year has been for breeding,
though it is satisfying to record another Spectacled Owl and 3 Black¬
footed Penguins, including twins.

The building of the new Ape and Monkey houses has resulted in the
loss of the Great Aviary and the consequent rehousing of a number of
birds. The opportunity was taken to rearrange a number of exhibits.
For example, the Scarlet Ibis are now housed outside alongside the
Cariamas and Kookaburras.

# # #

T

206

NEWS AND VIEWS

NEWS AND VIEWS

Dr. S. B. Kendall has two Citron-crested and three Roseate Cockatoos

in the nest. He has also had a minor invasion by predatory boys.

* # #

The Ospreys arrived back at Loch Garten for the twelfth successive
season, a pair of Snowy Owls on Fetlar have laid, and a pair of Golden
Eagles have successfully nested and reared a young one in the Lake
District. This is probably the first to be bred in England since the late
eighteenth century.

# # *

E. Norgaard-Olesen, Janderup, Denmark, 25th July: “ We have had a
warm spell for the last four weeks and the birds are doing well. I have one
well-grown young Blue-necked Mousebird in the nest, and two pairs of
Philippine Hanging Parrakeets are brooding for the first time, after being

in my possession for three years.”

# # #

The Great Indian Hornbill in the Curraghs Wildlife Park, Isle of Man,
had the misfortune to break off a piece of its large, curved beak and was
in danger of starving. A local dentist, however, took an impression for a
plastic replacement. The bird was given an anaesthetic and the plate was
then successfully screwed into position. It is apparently now doing well
again.

* * *

A note in Chester Zoo News , April, 1970, 6, states: “ For a second year
we have bred Louisiade Lorikeets Trichoglossus haematod aberrans.
A single chick has emerged from the nest box and is being fed by the
parents. We bred this species we believe for the first time in the British
Isles last year and are especially pleased as this is an early chick and the
pair may nest again.”

Bernard Roer, Phoenix, Arizona: “ My birds are not doing very well
this season. The weather was cold and extra dry until about the first of
May when it turned hot — it was no° yesterday (21st May). The
Australian birds are doing fairly well: Cape Barren Geese, nine; Black
Swans, seven, and more eggs; Leadbeater’s Cockatoos, five, and more eggs;
Crimson-winged Parrakeets, six; and Bourkes, Scarlet-chested and
Turquoisines have young.”

Dr. L. A. Swaenepoel (22nd July, 1970): “ We have been doing quite
well with Green Rosellas; twelve from two pairs. The third pair, the hen
of which is badly crippled, had ten infertile eggs. We expect to put up
five new pairs as we seem to have five hens amongst the youngsters. Of
Blue Bonnets there were only six good birds from seven pairs, but six of

NEWS AND VIEWS

207

them were 1969 birds. Unhappily, we lost nearly a score of this year’s
youngsters, mostly when just hatched. We thought we had played
safe (?) by transferring the eggs under trustworthy (!) Redrumps, but a lot
of mishaps occurred.”

# # *

George and Bessie Bray, San Francisco: “We have found that feeding
tomato to our Cock of the Rocks can keep them a deep scarlet colour.
We had not previously fed tomato and it was quite a trick to get them to
take it. We withheld all food and buried some Avocado (mouth-sized
cubes) under cubed tomato. They finally ate the tomato to get the
Avocado. Now we feed it freely and separately and they clear it up. Both
of our birds are males but we have two females in quarantine in Bogata,
Colombia, and if all goes well we should have them in six weeks! ”

Mrs. K. M. Scamell (1st July): “The White-eyed Quaker Babblers
did not rear to independence. A second round disappeared and a third
attempt is now in progress. We have, however, bred Lemon-rumped
Tanagers Ramphocelus icteronotus. Three eggs were laid, one fell from the
nest and was broken. Incubation of the remaining two eggs commenced
on 2 1 st May; two young birds hatched on 3rd June, and left the nest on
15th June. We separated them from their parents yesterday (30th June)
and caged them. They are feeding themselves. Rothschild’s Grackles
deserted their three chicks when three days old, and although hand¬
rearing was attempted it was not successful. They are incubating once
again. The Tacazze Sunbirds lost their youngster, we believe, to a shrew,
as did the Festive Tanagers.”

# # #

T. R. M. Brosset, Gothenburg, takes me to task for calling the Red-
masked Conure Aratinga rubrolarvata (p. 134). In this he is, of course,
academically correct. Peters, Check-list of Birds of the World , vol. Ill,
p. 187, in a footnote says: “ As long as Conurus was employed as the
generic name for the paroquets now placed in Aratinga, Psittacara
erythrogenys Lesson was unavailable as the name of this species by
reason of Conurus erythrogenys Lesson 1831 given to a Malayan bird;
Conurus rubrolarvatus Massena and Souanca 1854, was used as the first
available name. The use of Aratinga in place of Conurus now permits the
use of erythrogenys Lesson 1844.”

The Society’s Medal was awarded to W. Shore-Baily in 1925, under
the name Red-headed Conure Conurus rubrolarvatus. Thomas Brosset
reports that last year Hans H. Hansen, Vejen, Denmark, was successful
with this species: “ I think four young were reared.”

208

NEWS AND VIEWS

I have ample opportunity of studying the behaviour of several pairs of
Moorhens. But a point puzzles me, as it has many reputable ornithologists
in the past. When disturbed on land a Moorhen runs for cover, but
when suddenly disturbed on open water it sometimes dives and swims
under water. The point is mentioned by Witherby (v. 198, 305): “ Birds
which have dived when startled frequently remain almost submerged,
preferably under cover of bank or amongst plants or surface debris, often
exposing first beak only, and sometimes little more, or gradually showing
head or head and surface of back, and remaining thus till danger appears
to have passed.” A footnote deals with this problem and in fact says:
“ The means by which this is effected has been disputed. Some have
maintained that it is incredible that the buoyant bird — whatever may be
the case where submergence is only partial — could maintain itself almost
completely under water without artificial aid, and it has been emphatically
asserted that it does in fact hold on to the stems of water-plants with
its feet. . . It seems clear, however, that the bird is capable of submerging
at least the whole trunk without such assistance, and Dr. C. B. Ticehurst
has pronounced himself satisfied that a bird which showed no more than
the beak and fore-head above water did not hold on to anything with its
feet”

G. A. Smith, 20th July, 1970: “ This year’s breeding has been marred
(is there such an event as a good season?) by infertility. Carelessness
coupled with a heavy, and most unexpected fall of late snow, lost me my
mature lutino (albino) Cockatiels — the roof of a holding aviary collapsed
with the weight. Therefore I had to rely on their progeny. Unfortunately
young male Cockatiels are often infertile. Usually, I feel sure because
they lack a sense of “ physiological direction ” — when the hen is trod they,
as like as not, try to copulate with the head of the hen rather than the tail.
Or, and just as uselessly, sit like an avian jockey on the hen’s back.
Sometimes they may slowly spin around as if through moving they might
“ remember ” what to do next; but even this is beyond many and once
mounted they do little but admire the view from the higher advantage
point. My New Zealands are most disappointing. The Yellow-fronted
first pair had eleven eggs, none of which hatched — though all were fertile —
the chicks dying a few days before each should have hatched, despite the
excellent mothering of the hen. Next time she laid thirteen. After seven
had hatched the cock — the most charming and suave of birds — died after an
illness of less than a night’s duration. Acute congestion of the lungs, the
heart muscle literally ruptured trying to force blood through the useless
respiratory system. This was my twelfth post-mortem on a New Zealand,
and apart from five with psittacosis, all the rest have died from totally
disconnected illness, as if they wished to sample all known diseases during
their short life on this earth. The hen is masterfully rearing — the seven
chicks are now three weeks old. The other eggs I gave to a hybrid pair.

NEWS AND VIEWS

209

And the cock bird, I think it was him, decapitated the lot after a week or so.
The other pair of Yellow-fronted had seven eggs, three of which were
fertile and hatched. Two young died in the nest of aspergillosis (I have
decided never to use rotten wood for nest furniture, replacing this now
with inverted sods). The sole survivor is a hen. The next round of
seven eggs had only two fertile. The hen has never hatched more than
three, and I’ve given these to a pair of Red-fronted. I was hoping that
she’d nest again. Instead of which she is only brooding the “ memory ”.
New Zealands are most odd birds — they will moult and breed pell-mell
all at the same time. They do not stand a chance when disease strikes to
“ test ” them.

After much searching I managed to get a fine pair of Red-fronted from
our member David Castle. She has laid twice but unfortunately on both
occasions seven totally infertile eggs. The cock is too afraid of his spouse
to more than feed her. So apart from a few Norwich canaries, some few
Cockatiels and some, I hope, New Zealands success is bad. I did hold out
hope of getting the Longtails to nest, and though she sits inside the nest
most days, even now, I feel that it will have to be “ next year ”. I know
that it is a sign of desperation but I am positively looking forward to next
year. It would be impossible for it to duplicate this year’s literally
dozens of eggs and barely a chick.”

# # #

Tailpiece. During recent months several pairs of Red-rumped Parra-
keets have been sighted in the heart of Adelaide. L. R. Comport, Bird
Keeping in Australia , April 1970, reports that an unexpected sighting
from his office window prompted him to interrupt a telephone call to a
business friend with the comment “ Good heavens — Red-rumps.” The
friend’s rejoinder was somewhat confused but was to the effect that mini
skirts must be particularly short in that part of Adelaide!

A. A. P.

210

REVIEWS

REVIEWS

BIRDS OF THE LEBANON AND THE JORDAN AREA. By
S. Vere Benson. International Council for Bird Preservation, 1970
London and New York: distributed by F. Warne and Co. 60s.

Nowadays most regional bird books are the work of a group of authors,
and Miss Benson is to be commended for producing this admirable
work as a one-woman effort, both text and illustrations being her own.
We have become so used to the well-illustrated field-guides to birds,
available for Europe and North America, that when we find ourselves in
regions for which no such work is available, most of us are at a loss to
identify what we see. The Middle East has always represented a gap of
this kind in the regional coverage of field-guides, and the present work
provides just what is needed for the Western part of this area.

In the introduction the author sets the scene with her comments on
the varied habitats and the birds to be found there, and on the impressive
autumn raptor migration. She also makes a strong plea for conservation
in this region. A checklist of species with indication of status is included.
For each species notes are given on range, identification in the field,
voice, and habitat. Each is illustrated, 94 in colours and 258 in black and
white. The colour plates illustrate in particular those species occurring in
these regions and not found in the European field-guides, which most
people are likely to use in conjunction with the present volume. Species
only occasionally recorded are listed at the end of the main text. Many
of these are illustrated, and where this is not done a brief indication of
the salient points of recognition is given. An appendix illustrates
and comments on the recognition of difficult birds of prey in flight and
describes plumage variations of the Pied Wheatear and Persian Robin.
A second appendix gives brief descriptions and some illustrations of
the additional species likely to be encountered in Jordan.

A primary aim of the authoress in writing this book has been to make
the people of the Lebanon aware of their heritage of bird-life and to try
and awaken a desire to conserve it before it is to late. The International
Council for Bird Preservation has lent its support by publishing the book
and by planning for the production of an Arabic edition. The book is to be
recommended as a valuable addition to anyone’s books on bird identifi¬
cation; all profits from its sale will be given to the work of the I.C.B.P.

C. J. O. H.

# # *

REVIEWS

21 1

KRANKHEITEN DER VOGEL (Diseases of Birds). By H-S.
Raethel. Stuttgart: W. Keller & Co., 1966. Price DM. 5.80.

This excellent little book on bird illnesses can be recommended to all
who read German. It deals with bird diseases of all kinds, both those
due to infection and those due to malnutrition; accidental injuries;
and infestation by parasites. There are interesting discussions of various
aspects of bird behaviour and bird-keeping where these are relevant to the
main theme.

I fear that in Britain, where the private citizen is sometimes considered
unfit to have free access to modern medicines, some of the recommended
remedies may not be readily available to the rank and file of bird keepers.

The author points out that very many differently-caused illnesses may
give rise to the same or similar symtoms. Like most who have written on
this subject he recommends the use of small, heated cages for sick birds.
Another very experienced German aviculturist, Dr. Jurgen Nicolai, has,
however, argued cogently that it is much better to put the sick bird in a
large cage heated at one end only so that it can choose what degrees of
warmth it feels in need of.

The book is illustrated with a large number of very good drawings.
It is to be hoped it will be translated into English. D. G.

* * #

BIRDS OF THE PACIFIC NORTH-WEST (with special reference to
Oregon). By I. N. Garielson and S. G. Jewett. New York:
Dover Publications. London: Constable and Company Ltd. 1970.
Price 475. 6 d.

A strong and handsome reprint of an important textbook (formerly
titled Birds of Oregon) including one- to two-page descriptions and
biographies of each species and race recorded in the area, a short description
of the local life-zones and the progress of ornithological exploration there,
and a 29-page bibliography.

It seems debatable whether attempts should be made to bring this
type of textbook up to date as it seems pointless without a very thorough
revision, yet if this is attempted it is no longer the same book and arguable
that it were better to write a new one.

Meanwhile everyone seriously interested in the birds and the develop¬
ment of knowledge about them in an important area like this remains
anxious to have the original version on their shelves and must welcome
good reprints such as this. We should have more of them in the United
Kingdom as well. W.R.P.B.

212

NOTES

NOTES

COCKATIELS— THEIR VERSATILITY AS FOSTER PARENTS

During 1969, a pair of Lutino Cockatiels produced a fourth clutch of eggs, and
as they had reared three rounds I did not want them to suffer the strain of a fourth.
Having no normal cockatiels laying at the time, I decided to experiment with a pair
consisting of an old cock and a very immature hen. They had spent some weeks
in the box without laying, and I put in a single egg. This was accepted promptly,
and the following day the remainder of the clutch was added. In due course,
four chicks hatched and fledged — without the foster hen ever having laid !

This year, another pair of Lutinos deserted their three eggs, which I offered to a
similar foster pair (1967 cock, late 1969 hen). Again these were accepted, and
two duly hatched. After they had been close ringed, three more close-ringed
chicks were added from a pair (split Lutino cock /normal hen) which had hatched
eight of their 10 eggs, thus levelling off both pairs with five chicks each. These have
all fledged, and are independent.

Obviously one cannot draw definite conclusions from only two examples, but I
think it can be taken as indicative of possibilities. I shall certainly retain two or
three third round hens this year for similar use next season.

Finally, the first night that one of my hen Bourke’s stopped brooding, there was a
sharp frost, and the following morning one chick was dead, one nearly so (it died
24 hours later) and the third was revived. After being warmed and hand fed, this
was put into a nest of newly hatched and hatching normal cockatiels. I was quite
astonished at the way it thrived, and duly fledged. The sight of a comparatively
huge cockatiel pumping partly digested food into a tiny Bourke s, nearly beheading
it and knocking it off the perch in the process, is the most comic I have beheld.
Incidentally, I wonder if this is unique? Unfortunately the photographs I took
of this have not come out well enough for reproduction, although the prints are
quite reasonable.

D. G. Marriott.

* * *

CORRIGENDUM

INDIAN RINGNECKED PARROTS— THE COLOURS OF
VARIANT BIRDS

Dr. Swaenepoel has written to point out that in his article on Indian Ringnecked
Parrots (May-June issue, pp. 92-94), he had made a momentary error and written
that an albino male might be expected to have a red and black collar. He points
out that since the blue form lacks the red of the collar, and the lutino lacks the blacky
he would, of course, expect the albino to show no collar at all.

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY : 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier

PRICES OF ADMISSION

Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicultural Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 5s. {non-members) Children: 3/-

Coach parties of 25 and over: adults 3/-, children 2/-

Organised school parties: 2/- each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance
NO DOGS ALLOWED

The Ornamental Pheasant Trust and Norfolk Wildlife Park are on the main
A1Q67— 14 miles from Norwich.

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between' Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A3G at The Red Lion, Woolverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

TO FROME

3 MILES

& OPEN DAILY

including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

T° WARMINSTER Nodogsadmitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 326

MEALWORMS

(English bred)

Provide a useful addition to the dietary needs of most
insectivorous birds, as well as being a tasty titbit well
liked by the majority of these birds.

1 oz. 3/9; 2 oz. 6/6; 4 oz. 12/-; 8 oz. 20/-; 1 lb. 32/6;

2 lbs. 58/-; 4 lbs. 105/-; 6 lbs. 145/-

All these prices are carriage paid.

E. W. Coombs Limited, (Dept. A.M.)

Frindsbury Road, Strood, Kent.

Phone: Medway 79886/7 Grams: Avicult-Rochester

Wildlife Calendar, 1971

12 Superb Drawings by

ROBERT G1LLMOR

BIRDS AND MAMMALS OF EAST AFRICA

I4J" x I0J". Only 12/6 (including postage)

Send Cheque/P.O. to: The Penna Press, 6 Gombards, St. Albans

IDEAL CHRISTMAS PRESENT

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGSDEN BIRD GARDENS

The largest private collection of ornamental game birds in the
British Isles, also Waterfowl and Rare Breeds of Poultry, etc.

Open every day

10 a.m. to 7 p.m. or sunset if earlier

Send 3 /- for o 40-page brochure

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422
The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Te!.: Oakley 2745

When Visiting the

COTSWQLDS

AVI CULT UR IS TS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

The Aviculturai Society of America

Founded 1927

Hon. President: Dr. Jean Delacour.

President: Mr. David King
Secretary: Richard C. Frantzen,

13914 Don Julian Road, La Puente, California 91746, U.S.A.

The Society year begins January 1st, but new members may join
at any time and are entitled to the back issues of the AVICULTURAL
BULLETIN, Roster for the current year and a copy of the By Laws.
One membership includes husband and wife. The annual dues
for domestic (Canada & Mexico included) membership are $4.00.
Foreign dues are $5.00. Please send remittance to the Membership
Secretary, Mrs. Marian Wagner, 565 East Channel Rd., Santa
Monica, California 90402. Make your check payable to
Aviculturai Society of America. Foreign applicants please remit
dues by International Bank Draft or Money Order only.

The Aviculturai Society of South Australia

Founded 1928

The oldest Aviculturai Society in Australia invites all interested in
aviculture to become members. Subscription is f 1 5 s. 0 d. sterling
per annum, and this includes a monthly magazine Bird Keeping
in Australia mailed to all members. This is entirely original and deals
with the keeping and breeding of many Australian and exotic
species of birds.

Please forward membership application and subscription to the
Secretary, Eric Baxter, 17 Benjamin Street, Manningham,

South Australia, 5086.

The Aviculturai Society of Australia

Catering for the English-speaking breeders of Australian birds
throughout the world. Monthly magazine Australian Aviculture
posted free to all members.

Overseas subscriptions : United States of America, $3.00;
all other countries, Aust. $2.50.

Secretary, Frank A. Ripper 10 Tyne Street, Burwood,

Victoria, 3125, Australia.

ENGLISH NAMES
OF THE PARROTS

A list of 2,000 English names used by
ornithologists during this century

Price Is. 6d. post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

A vacancy occurs in a private institute in West
Germany for an experienced young specialist
in the care of rare birds, such as sunbirds , hum¬
ming birds and other softbills; also possibly
orchids .

Applicants should send particulars of qualifications,
references and a photograph to

“I.C ” c/o Hon. Secretary,

Avicultural Society, Galley's Wood,

Edenbridge, Kent.

THE AV8CULTUERAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

( Established 1956)

Invites your membership. Subscription $2.00 Aust. Due on the
1 st January each year. Magazine dealing with all aspects of
aviculture posted each month. Back issues supplied where
available.

Send application to:

The Secretary: W. L. Burns, P.O. Box 55, Morley, 6062,
Western Australia.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the:

Hon Secretap% Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone: Henlow Camp 342

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members' advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement , which must be sent to A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column , but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable.

Wanted. — Records of Parrots Bred in Captivity, parts 1, 3 and 6, or would buy
complete set: — Hon. Secretary, Avicultural Society, Galley’s Wood, Edenbridge,
Kent.

Wanted. — The Mammals of China and Mongolia, two volumes by G. M. Allen,
published in 1938. Please contact Edward R. FitzSimmons, Suite 815, Financial
Center Building, 14th Street, Oakland, California 94612, U.S.A.

For Sale. — Avicultural Magazine, 1950 — 1969. Twenty volumes, in parts as
published, £15 Os. Od. : — Hon. Secretary, Avicultural Society, Galley’s Wood,
Edenbridge, Kent.

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10--14
Macklin Street, London, W.C.2, to whom members should address all orders
for extra copies and back numbers. Subscription and back number orders from
non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., S6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wykeham
Press, 85 High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained, price 15s. each, postage extra. Alternatively the
printers can undertake the binding of complete current volumes (for which they
have binding cases in stock), price £ 2 per volume, postage extra. They can
also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for which
binding cases have to be specially made), price £2 10s., postage extra. Members
are requested to state whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be
bound with the volume.

NEW MEMBERS

The twenty Candidates for Membership in the July-August 1970, number of
the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

CORRECTED NAME

For Thomas L. Wilkinson, read Thomas L. Wilkerson.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Edwin J. Allen, Jr., to 809 12th Street, Bellingham, Washington 98225, U.S.A.

J. C. Barlass, to Applegarth, Church Road, Singleton, Nr. Blackpool, Lancs.

Paolo Bertagnolio, to Valle Benedetta, Via Aurelia Km. 24, 300, 00050, Roma-
Torrimpietra, Italy.

J. M. Dingemans, to Duinstraat 18, Hoogerheide, Holland.

Stephen Andrew Duckett, to 42 Cranbourne Road, Frankston, Victoria 3199,
Australia.

P. H. Hastings, to “ Woodville ”, Little Hyden Lane, Clanfield, Nr. Petersfield,
Hants.

E. J. T. Housden, to Brympton, Ridgeway Road, Dorking, Surrey.

George Howarth, to Club Playa de Flamingo, Apartado 13, Santa Cruz, Guana-
caste, Costa Rica, Central America.

Clive G. Roots, to Assiniboine Park Zoo, Winnipeg 20, Manitoba, Canada.

Manfred F. Schweiger, to 7501 Reichenbach liber Karlsruhe, Tulpenstrasse 8,
W. Germany.

Daniel P. Shearing, to 34 Sydenham Avenue, Liverpool, 17.

Kenneth Edwin Lawrence Simmons, to Dept. Psychology, The University,
Leicester LEi 7RH.

Miss Gillian Watson, to Le Nier Cheva, Les Platons, Trinity, Jersey, Channel
Islands.

Thomas Lee Wilkerson, to Route 1, Box 68, Riley, Kansas 66531, U.S.A.

Arthur John Wright, to c/o Dr. K. B. Wright, Madadeni Hospital, Newcastle,
Natal, South Africa.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

August Anzenberger, Max-Planck-Institut fur Verhaltensphysiologie, 8131
Seewiesen, West Germany. Proposed by Dr. J. Nicolai.

Anthony J. Ayer, Richards & Ayer, P.O. Box 754, 12 Strand Street, Frederiksted,
St. Croix, Virgin Islands 00840, U.S.A. Proposed by John W. Livermore.

C. J. Betts, Cherry Orchard, Wyre Forest, Nr. Kidderminster, Worcs. Proposed
by Lt.-Col. H. W. Clayden.

Robert Burness, “ Roburn Ranch ”, P.O. Box 270, Westonaria, Transvaal,
South Africa. Proposed by F. Barnicoat.

Carlos Cam6es, Caixa Postal 74, Benguela, Angola. Proposed by Joaquim F.
Simoes.

Miss M. R. Clayden, Anatomy Dept., Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia,
Canada. Proposed by Lt.-Col. H. W. Clayden.

M. D. Coulter, 3 West Road, Gamlingay, Sandy, Beds. Proposed by Peter Howe.
Robert E. Dooley, 5814 High Star PH. 667-0835, Houston, Texas 77036, U.S.A.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Miss Margaret May Joy Fuller, 4 Shotover Kilns, Old Road, Headington,
Oxford OX3 8TA. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Albert J. Gough, Broadmere, Broadmere Common, Henfield, Sussex. Proposed
by A. J. Lambert.

John M. Hornett, 189 Asoke Road, Bangkok, G.P.O. Box 2087, Thailand.
Proposed by R. G. Crowe.

Miss Carol Anne Jefferies, 337 Leasowe Road, Wallasey, Cheshire. Proposed
by Michael F. Coupe.

Alan Longhurst, 1440 Crest Road, Del Mar, California 92014, U.S.A. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

David George Marriott, 415 Eastfield Road, Peterborough PEi 4RE. Proposed
by G. A. Smith.

Kerry A. Muller, Taronga Zoo, P.O. Box 20, Mosman 2088, N.S.W., Australia.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

L. L. Munger, D.V.M., 732 Frey Drive, Manhattan, Kansas 66502, U.S.A.
Proposed by Miss P. Barclay-Smith.

Maharaja Jamsaheb of Nawanagar, The Palace, Jamnagar, India. Proposed
by J. J. Yealland.

Dr. Rolando Romero, Casilla 682, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. Proposed
by A. A. Prestwich.

Victor Albert Stagman, 24 1st Avenue West, Parktown North, Johannesburg,
Transvaal, South Africa. Proposed by F. Bamicoat.

Lawrence E. Tetzlaff, “Jungle Larry”, Jungle Larry’s Safari Land, Inc., at
Caribbean Gardens, Naples, Florida 33940, U.S.A. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

W. M. Zuurdeeg, “ Sant Roc ”, Brede, Nr. Rye, Sussex. Proposed by Miss
K. Bonner.

DONATIONS
(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

F. C. Barnicoat D. Goodwin

W. H. Collard G. A. Smith

P. L. Wayre

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

ft-/

AVICULTURAL
MAGAZINE

VOLUME 76
NUMBER 6
NOVEMBER— DECEMBER
1970

PRICE 8/6

CONTENTS

PAGE

“Mr. Barnes Wingdove”. An Obituary (with coloured plate) by

D. M. Reid-Henry . . . . . . . . 213

Breeding the Lemon-rumped Tanager {Ramphocelus icteronotus), by

Mrs. K. M. Scamell ......... 216

Behaviour notes on the Barred and Andalusian Hemipodes {Turnix suscitator

and Turnix sylvatica), by Jeffrey Trollope . . . . .219

Breeding the Stonechat ( Saxicola torquata ), 1970, by J. Doughty . 227

Breeding the Alpine Clough ( Pyrrhocorax g. graculus ) at the Norfolk
Wildlife Park, by Philip Wayre .......

230

Breeding the Grey Touraco ( Corythaixoides concolor concolor) at the Jersey

Zoological Park, (with plates), by Grenville Roles .... 232

Breeding the Double Yellow-headed Amazon ( Amazona ochrocephala oeatrix ),

by Clifford Smith ......... 234

The breeding of the Corella (Long-billed or Slender-billed Cockatoo)
Cacatua ( Licmetis ) tenuirostris, (with plate) by Alan Lendon .

Breeding the Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, by Clifford Smith .

Breeding the Azure-winged Magpie ( Cyanopica cyanus cooki ) at the Norfolk
Wildlife Park, by Philip Wayre .......

Breeding the Ornate Lorikeet ( Trichoglossus ornatus), by John Bunker

Breeding the Fawn-naped Tanager, by H. Murray . . . . .

Breeding Season 1970 at the Norfolk Wildlife Park, (with plates) by Philip
Wayre ...........

Some Aviary Notes, 1970 by K. A. Norris ......

Council Meeting

247

British Aviculturists’ Club
News and Views

Notes

252

the avicultural society

Founded 1894

Membership Subscription is £2 (U.S.A., $6.00) per annum, due on 1st January
each year, and payable in advance. Subscriptions, Changes of Address, Names of
Candidates for Membership, etc., should be sent to the Hon. Secretary.

Hon. Secretary and Treasurer: A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s Wood, Nr. Eden-
bridge, Kent.

THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE

The Magazine is published bi-monthly, and sent free to all members of the
Avicultural Society. Members joining at any time during the year are entitled to
the back numbers for the current year on the payment of subscription.

Editor: Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, 51 Warwick Avenue, London, W.9.

Assistant Editor: Dr. C. J. O. Harrison, 14 Dawlish Avenue, Perivale, Middlesex.

Avicult. Mag,

Bronze-winged Dove

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY
Vol. 76. — No. 6. — All rights reserved. NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1970

n

MR. BARNES-WINGDOVE ”

AN OBITUARY

By D. M. Reid-Henry (Woodford Green, Essex, England)

When I was very small, about three years old I think, I found myself
spending a holiday on a tea-estate known as “ Woodside ” in the hills
of Ceylon. The planter was my grandfather, and a large percentage of
his largish family were, if I remember well, also there. Certainly there
were three aunts present and an uncle or two in addition to my own
parents.

Life was very good in the eyes of a small boy and I particularly
appreciated the attentions of the youngest of my aunts because she was
clever at making birds’ nests out of plasticine with eggs to go in them and
a separate mother-bird to sit on top. She was also good at chasing
butterflies for me to examine and admire, and was not repelled by frogs.

However, one day a new interest came into the adult conversation
which was led by my father, and it concerned the fact that a gentleman
by the name of Barnes-Wingdove was in the neighbourhood, and that my
father had in fact seen him. Apparently he was a very splendid person,
and altogether of great interest. Secretly I wanted to see him, but dared
to confide this desire only to my favoured aunt. Time, of course, has
removed all the details of how the meeting was to be arranged, but
everyone decided upon an evening walk with that end in view. I remem¬
ber the walk not so much on account of Mr. Barnes-Wingdove, but
because in that part of the island the jungle harboured a plentiful leech
population, and I was initiated into the ready methods of getting rid of
them when they had collected for a feast upon my person. (Happily I
was unaware of the presence of these parasites until after the party
returned home and I was being prepared for the tub!)

During the walk, quite suddenly I heard someone say in a hoarse
! whisper, “ There he is! Quick!! There!, Going through the trees! ”

| My aunt had grabbed my arm and was urgently pointing into the gloomy
, forest nave. “ There; did you see him? ” Alas, I had not; and I won¬
dered about the strange ability of adults to see someone “ there ” when
he was obviously not there !

Fortunately for children, disappointments can be short-lived and I
soon ceased to worry about Mr. Barnes-Wingdove because a troop of
u

214

D. M. REID-HENRY — “ MR. BARNES-WINGDOVE ”

Grey Wanderoo monkeys paid us a visit; and there were plenty of dancing
dragon-flies over the hill stream to interest me. A large blue-black
Carpenter-bee had a nest in one of the verandah beams and I daily was
able to watch her come and go. My brother had found an elegant
web-spider who had netted the passage between the trellis on the wall
and a hibiscus bush, and she was busy executing capital punishment on
insect trespassers who essayed to pass on their varying occupations.
Once the Carpenter-bee was indiscreet enough to get herself tied up in
the spider’s web, and I well remember her annoyance. The change in
her drone from a dignified bass to the strident “ eeeeee . . . e . . . z ” of
extreme petulance, was enough to frighten me! — and the spider too was
hesitant when she came out from her rest-room beneath a hibiscus leaf
to investigate her victim. She decided not to press her toll-charge and
retired, no doubt complaining to herself, about vandalism and asking
herself “who is to repair the depredations? ” This question was purely
rhetorical, because as a matter of course she consumed her web every
night and spun a new one by breakfast time! The bee disentangled
herself and flew away to get rid of the sticky strands and clean up.

So Mr. Barnes-Wingdove passed out of my interest for two years, but
he was never forgotten. His death came somewhat suddenly when I
discovered that he had an alias which quite altered my imagined impression
of him. For some time previous to my better understanding I had
entertained misgivings about his character because in answer to my j
questions about him I had been told that he had green wings, a scarlet
beak and flew very fast! This information I had filed away in my mind
labelled, “ for future comprehension ”, because I was not brought up to
doubt the words of my seniors, and to solicit too much information was
not in my make-up.

But one day I was bothering the taxidermist at the Colombo Museum
whilst he was in the process of setting up a specimen of a very attractive
bird. I was told in answer to my query that the bird was a Bronze-winged
Dove!! The penny dropped at last and the ghost that had hovered
periodically over my head for what had seemed a long time was exorcised
and finally laid. The mysterious and puzzling gentleman was dead ; and
with him I buried the childish notion that people say what they mean,
and say it clearly to be understood aright. Another lesson — that small
boys should not eavesdrop on adult conversation — I only learned when I
myself became adult !

Chalcophaps indica, or Bronze-winged Dove, is perhaps better known to
aviculturists as the Emerald Dove. I will not enlarge on the suitability
of this English name because a whole essay could be written about the
patent absurdity of many vernacular names given to birds and animals.
It is in this case enough to identify the species which is a well-known bird
anyway, although not as commonly kept as many other, less attractive,
subjects.

D. M. REID-HENRY “ MR. BARNES-WINGDOVE ” 21 5

I will not bore the reader with a description because I hope and trust the
accompanying colour plate will serve adequately to convey a fair idea of
the cock bird’s appearance. The hen is duller, and lacks most of the
grey and white top to her head, but it must be pointed out to those who
do not know this dove, that the green of the wings and back is all metallic,
and in a different light it can appear just like burnished bronze. Hence
the name. It bears no resemblance to an emerald whatever.

In its jungle home, this bird is rather to be heard more than seen, but
it has the habit of alighting on jungle tracks and cart roads to pick about
for scraps of food. As one walks down such a path a pair of these doves
may be flushed when they are engaged upon the elevating job of examining
buffalo or other manure for any edible matter. They will fly further
along and alight again not very far away, but if persistently disturbed they
make off into the forest with rapid flight whither it is useless to try and
follow.

They are not rare birds and are not very particular about altitude up
to about 8,000 ft. but they are not to be found in very dry places or
where the forest is too thin, for they seem to have a distinct preference for
cover.

The only one I ever possessed myself I bought from a Calcutta dealer
out of humanitarian motive. The bird was very timid and wild and
would not settle down in my mixed aviary at all, so I sent him with a
friend who was going up to the Burma front to be released en route.

Wild doves in sudden confinement are not an edifying sight : they batter
themselves in distressing fashion and are better off released unless one
has the time to devote to taming. But this dove can do very well in a
suitable enclosure and they have been successfully bred on quite a number
of occasions. A friend of mine in Ceylon regularly kept pairs in an aviary
with suitable companions. He fed them all on a mixed diet of bird-seeds,
berries and a daily dish of succulent termites. A small natural stream
ran through the enclosure and all things were ideally arranged with the
least trouble and inconvenience to the owner. In English conditions
matters are not quite so simple; but a few of the Society’s members have
succeeded well in their treatment of Bronze-winged Doves and it is to
be hoped that a good strain of aviary-bred birds will be established.
However, I would hate to see them “ improved ” by line-breeding and
other means which have produced such disasters as “ Pouters ”.

The nest is said to be a more substantial structure than that of most
pigeons ; but although I spent some time in areas where these doves were
not rare, both in India and Ceylon, I was never able to find a nest myself.

All accounts of the Bronze-wing pay some tribute to the bird’s very
rapid flight, and I can endorse these reports from my knowledge of the
bird in the wild. It is however tragic that this attribute of speedy move¬
ment is frequently the cause of death. As it flies low generally, and
dodges through the trees it often mistakes the wall of a native house for
a space and dashes itself to death.

216

K. M. SCAMELL — BREEDING THE LEMON-RUMPED TANAGER

BREEDING THE LEMON-RUMPED TANAGER

(Ramphocelus icteronotus )

By Mrs. K. M. Scamell (Newdigate, Surrey, England)

The Lemon-rumped Tanager is one of the eight species of velvet
Tanagers found in South America and Mexico. Its range is Panama,
West Colombia, Western Ecuador and N.W. Peru. It is said to inter¬
breed with the Flame-rumped Tanager [Ramphocelus flammigerus) on the
western slopes of the Andes in Colombia where males with orange rumps
and females with the chest tinged orange-scarlet are found.

The adult male Lemon-rumped Tanager is a deep glossy velvety-black
with the lower back, rump and upper tail coverts brilliant lemon-yellow.
The female is greyish-brown above, tinged olive; the lower back, rump,
upper tail coverts and underparts are a lighter lemon yellow and the
throat and sides of the head whitish.

We obtained a pair of Lemon-rumped Tanagers in the winter of 1965/6
in exchange for other Tanagers. The previous owner stated that the
pair had attempted to breed in a mixed aviary, but were unsuccessful due
to the competition for the limited live food supplied. After caging for
a while we turned the pair out into a lightly planted aviary measuring
6 ft. x 3 ft. x 6 ft. 3 in. high. This flight led into a small compartment
within a birdroom. The compartment measured 2 ft. x 2 ft. x 6 ft. 3 in.
high. The birdioom has an electric heater thermostatically controlled
to give a minimum temperature of about 40/45^. On the 26th April
1966 a broken egg was found in the flight. Various half-open nest-boxes
had been placed in the flight and also a small nest-basket near the roof
of the flight. It was in this basket the hen built a cup of grasses. It
was poorly constructed and seemed too small for the bird. Here she
laid one egg and incubated it from the 29th April until the 23rd May
when it was removed. It was fertile but “ dead in shell ”. She again
laid and commenced incubation on the 28th June, one chick was seen on
the 15th July but this disappeared the next day. No further breeding
attempt was made that year. The hen appeared to be an old bird so
that when an opportunity came in September to acquire another but
younger pair, we did so. The new cock died that night and the old cock
some months later, so we were left with two “ hens ”. However, during
the summer of 1967 the new “ hen ” developed male plumage and on
19th September 1967 we saw the old hen once again building a flimsy nest
in her nest-basket. Nothing came of the breeding attempt.

On 22nd April 1968 the old hen started carrying grasses to the basket
she had used before. This continued until 12th May when a soft shelled
egg was found in the shelter. Nest building continued and on the 22nd
May when she was in the shelter feeding, I checked the nest to find one

K. M. SCAMELL — BREEDING THE LEMON-RUMPED TANAGER

217

egg only. It was light blue with black flecks at the large end. Incubation
continued until 4th June when she abandoned the nest. The one egg
was found to have a hole in it. A search in the flight revealed some
eggshells so it looked as if three eggs had been laid in total. I replaced
the small basket with a slightly larger one, but she did not take to it and no
further breeding attempts were made in 1968. In 1969 no breeding was
attempted even though the new basket was replaced by the original one.

Both birds came through the following winter very well, outside in all
weathers except frosts, so about the middle of April 1970 when both
birds were in breeding condition they were moved to another and much
larger aviary. The flight measured 1 5 ft. x 3 ft. x 6 ft. high and also
led into a compartment within a birdroom. The compartment measures
4 ft. x 3 ft. x 6 ft. high. The adjacent aviary houses a pair of Rothchild’s
Mynahs. This time three nest-baskets were placed about 5 ft. 3 in. high
on the north wall of the shelter, and no baskets were placed in the flight.
By the 8th May the floor of the shelter was littered with nesting material
(hay and twigs) which had fallen from two of the baskets, her old original
one and the slightly larger one which she had ignored the previous two
years. The third basket was larger still but she showed no interest in it.
Finally she chose the smallest basket and by the evening of the 21st May
the nest was complete but this time the nesting material was higher and
the cup much deeper than evei before; one egg had been laid that day
and a second one was laid on the 23rd May and she was seen to be incuba¬
ting. We did not see the male bird take any part in the nesting activities
but the pair are very nervous, so much so that the door of the birdroom
had to be kept closed. Once it was opened the hen came off the nest.
However, on 1st and 2nd June she stayed on her nest whilst the food pot
was being changed. Two chicks hatched on the 3rd June, 14 days after
the first egg was laid. The weather was very hot and the temperature
in the birdroom was in the 8o°sF during this part of June. The next
two weeks were uneventful, the chicks feathered up and large quantities
of mealworms and maggots were supplied together with the normal diced
fruit mixed with insectivorous food. The heads of both young birds
could be seen above the nest on the 14th June and at 6.45 a.m. next
morning one bird had left the nest and was on the floor and the other was
perched on the edge of the nest. They were quite small compared with
their parents and coloured like the hen but paler. The compartment
slide was shut with the parents inside and we thus made sure that no
bird could get into the flight. We just could not risk the }^oung birds
getting drowned in the first thunderstorm. This so often happens with
aviary bred birds during the first few days out of the nest. The second
young bird finally left the nest 3J hours later. The weather was much
cooler, around 6o°F in the daytime with the night temperature down to
48°F but we were back to 8o°F by the 18th June. The smaller of the
two young birds which measured about 3 in. in length, was perching well

2l8

K. M. SCAMELL — BREEDING THE LEMON-RUMPED TANAGER

but the larger was always on the floor or on a log which had been placed
there. A closer look from a few feet away showed one leg dangling as if
broken. Whenever one approached the compartment both parents
uttered loud warning calls but the young birds themselves were very
placid. The adult birds seem to have no song at any time, only a loud
chirping when alarmed.

By the 22nd June the smaller of the two birds was making short flights
and perching high up and two days later the one with the broken leg had
followed, so we opened the slide and let all four birds enter the flight at
will, but shut them inside at night. By the 29th June it was difficult to
tell at a glance the young birds from their mother — they were so alike in
colouration and size. The next day the hen was seen to repair her nest
and spar with one of the young birds so we felt the time had come to
separate them from their parents. We caught them up and caged them
well away from their aviary. It was some hours before droppings showed
they were feeding themselves but at dusk both birds were at the feeding
pot. The fractured leg of the first bird out of the nest seemed to have
healed but it had been a bad break just above the joint and the bird had
difficulty in perching. On the 21st July we took it to a local veterinary
surgeon who successfully amputated the leg above the break. The bird
was soon perching and feeding well and seemed to have made a complete
recovery. However, on 16th August when in an aviary and after a heavy
rainstorm, it was found wet through on the grass and unable to fly. It
was picked up and placed on the floor of its shelter but when we returned
within the hour it was dead. It had apparently injured the stump
remaining from the amputation and died from loss of blood — a sad
ending.

In the meantime the parents had been supplied with more nesting
material and the nest was rebuilt by the hen, anyway we never saw the
male carrying any nesting material. The first egg of a clutch of two
was laid on 6th July and one day later she was incubating with the
temperature at 88°F. Two chicks hatched on the 19th July — again on
the 14th day since the first egg was laid. Both young birds left the nest
on the 1st August, the 14th day since they were hatched. This time no
legs were broken. I measured them next day, just 3 in. from the tip of
the beak to their J in. long tails ! The parents measure approximately
8 in. Again the parents were shut in the compartment and successfully
reared the two birds until we separated them on the 20th August, 20 days
after leaving the nest. They could feed themselves and after a few days
in a cage we put them in an aviary with the one survivor of the first clutch.
Very little live food is taken and this makes me wonder how much live
food was fed by the parents who are very insectivorous, particularly when
they are offered mealworms. However, on reflection I can recall occasions
during the nestling stage when a whole pot of mealworms and gentles
would be consumed in a few hours and as gentles have never been

K. M. SCAMELL — BREEDING THE LEMON-RUMPED TANAGER

219

particularly relished by the adult birds, I am sure these have been fed to
the youngsters. The three young birds are almost indistinguishable
from each other (1st September 1970) either in colouring or in size, being
almost fully grown. There are patches of lemon amongst the whitish
underparts, but we can see no sexual differences. The parents show no
signs of nesting again though as yet they have not commenced to moult.

REFERENCES

Mayer de Shauensee, R. Birds of Colombia.

Austin, Oliver L., Jun. Birds of the World.

As described above, Mrs. K. M. Scamell has bred the Lemon-rumped
Tanager ( Ramphocelus icteronotus ). It is believed this may be a first
success.

Any member knowing of a previous breeding of this species in Great
Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once with the
Hon. Secretary.

BEHAVIOUR NOTES ON THE
BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES

(Turnix suscitator and Turnix sylvatica)

By Jeffrey Trollope (Hounslow, Middlesex, England)
Introduction

The reproductive behaviour of the genus Turnix is accepted as being
polyandrous. Ali (1964) writes of the larger and more brightly-coloured
hens of T. suscitator fighting rival females for possession of a cock, laying
a clutch of eggs and leaving the cock to incubate and rear the chicks after
hatching. Whistler (1963) selects T. sylvatica as representative of the
genus with the same reproductive behaviour.

Sutter (1964) in an article on the genus, states that, although the cock
incubates and rears the chicks, the hen may occasionally assist during a
few days after hatching. He suggests that there is evidence from field
observations that the hen lays several sets of eggs to be attended by
different cocks.

This paper is based on two seasons observations on captive T. suscitator
the Barred Hemipode or Bustard Quail. Some preliminary notes have
also been made on T. sylvatica , the Andalusian Hemipode, also known as
the Little Buttonquail or Striped Buttonquail. From the examination
of skins, it would appear that the birds are of the sub-species T. suscitator
taigoor and T. sylvatica dussumier.

220 J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES

Birds Observed and Methods

The information on T. suscitator consisted of notes on three adults and
four broods of chicks, some of which were watched at the adult stage. All
observations were made from a shed which acted as an efficient “ hide
The birds were housed in a planted aviary 12 ft. x 8 ft. x 8 ft.

The notes on T. sylvatica were limited, as these birds did not breed,
although eggs were laid at random. Two pairs were observed for one
season, one pair housed in the aviary mentioned above, the other in a
smaller planted aviary 7 ft. x 5 ft. x 6 ft. The shed acting as a hide for the
birds in the large aviary only. Their behaviour was recorded during
observation and later, transcribed into a log-book.

Behaviour and Reproduction

As previously described in Trollope (1967), when T. suscitator were
first bred, I removed the hen when the chicks were seven days old, as
the hen showed no signs of interacting with the chicks or cock. The pair
bond had been strong between the adult birds until the chicks hatched.
After the chicks were fully grown and removed from the cock, I replaced
hen “A” with hen “ B ”. As stated I was perhaps too hasty in removing
the original hen, but the literature available indicated the possibility of the
dominant hen causing trouble.

On breeding Turnix tanki , the Yellow-legged Buttonquail, Seth-Smith
(1903) observed that the hen did not help with the rearing of the chicks.
However, he separated the hen, as she was eating the food meant for the
chicks. The date of separation was not given, but one chick died at three
days, presumably after removal of the hen.

In his paper on Turnix varia, the “ Painted Quail ” (1905) the hen was
also removed after the chicks hatched, no date was given. However, it is
interesting to note that courtship feeding, or “ tit-bitting ” was observed,
the hen feeding the cock, or rather offering food, as I have noted with
T. suscitator.

As shown in the table after the first brood was reared, with the three
succeeding broods, the hen was left with the cock and chicks.

Contrary to my impressions, gained from the brief time that the hen
was left with the first brood, and limited reference to the literature, the
hen fed the chicks and retained a strong pair bond with the cock. At
night they would roost together in the clumped position, the chicks
covered by cock and hen up to the age of about 14 days. From this age
a lateral-to-lateral clumping position was usually adopted, but sometimes
the hen would still try to cover one or two chicks, the cock struggling to
cover the remaining chick or chicks.

During daylight, the hen would feed all the chicks, but as they grew
older a pattern of the hen “ adopting ” one or two chicks seemed to
develop.

Synopsis of Reproduction, Turnix suscitator

J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES 221

be

g

O Vj

S3

pq x

<D

X

+

+

+

<0 X3 co

D 1) V

CD <u o
CJ ^ PP

« OO

+

TJ

^ <y

•2 5

s a

0) <u

P4tf

co 0)
"o 03

i-c Q

o

3
»— >

£

0

O

n-£

be

0

<5

CO

pq

4-»

O

-2

bo

O'

-M

O

4->

ON

M

►H

*3

X3

<u

§ §
Sq
0} w

pH *3
rj C

S «*

X

+

x 2

0)

ip

a

be

O c3

0

<D

3

H— j

CO

«.«

0

co^

K op

6 g
£

X

vO

N

£

X

V-

pP

+J

OO

CJ

1>

00

00

vO

4J

vO

vO

O'

a

O'

O'

1-1

0

w

M

0x3X3 g

^ ^ J ^

P WH) PP

§(Sa s,

ZWQ T
.0

CD

X3

Vh
CO
Tj- I

x

. O'
bo w
3
<
w

bfi

•TJ <U

(U OT

u X3

£ g

X3 CD

co o
3 ch

<D

p* J2

g CO

8 j;

<D O

§3

CD O

PP

PP

222 J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES

The whole family would dust-bathe and sun-bathe together, allo-
preening occurred between the adult pair, both adults preening the chicks.
Dharmakumarsinji (1945) reports that the hen fed the young and clumped
with the chicks and cock in captivity. He also saw hen, cock and young
together in the wild. The birds concerned were Turnix suscitator taigoor.

Introduction of Hen to Two Cocks ( T . suscitator )

Although the value of an attempt to establish a “ polyandrous group ”
in a small aviary 12 ft. x 8 ft. x 8 ft. was in doubt, I thought the observa¬
tions might prove interesting. Two cocks were therefore released into
the aviary on the 25th June, 1968. During the day they showed a good
deal of social interaction clumping together and allo-preening. The next
day hen “ B ” was released, she followed each cock alternately, with the
normal locomotion, a rapid “ pigeon-like ” walk; the she would break
into a run, chasing a cock with her dorsal and lateral feathers erect. She
pecked at their tails, sometimes holding the tail in her bill and pulling
the cock up short. When he pulled free the chase would be resumed.

During the chasing the pursued cock would give a sharp “ tuk-tuk ”
but the hen was silent. That evening, the hen roosted in the clumped
position with one cock, the other cock roosting on the other side of the
aviary. The cocks were fighting the following morning and although no
damage was visible, I removed the cock that she had roosted with the
previous evening.

Introduction of a Second Cock (7\ sylvatica)

With this species, I decided to try to introduce a cock in the same
aviary as an established pair. The pair concerned were released in the
aviary mentioned above on 31st March 1969 and a second cock was
released on the 31st May 1969. He was immediately attacked by the
hen, who rushed at him, giving jabs at his head and nape. He laid flat
on the ground, the posture like that of the alarm crouch described by
Harrison (1965) for Excalfactoria chinensis. This posture apparently
acted as an efficient “ cut-off” or inhibitor for aggression, as the hen
walked away. The cock laid perfectly still for about one minute but when
he began to walk he was attacked by the mated cock, and again by the hen.
Both these attacks had the same pattern as the first, a rush, followed by
jabs at the head and nape. I then removed the introduced cock to prevent
injury.

Voice

Turnix suscitator

The major vocalization for this species (or perhaps the most significant
vocal signal) is the “ purring ” call, written as “ Krrrrrrrrr ” by Henry
(1955). Both adult hens observed would give this call at frequent
intervals. When walking they would suddenly freeze in an upright

j. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES 223

posture, stretch the neck, then slowly lower the head, the bill nearly
touching the ground, and as the head is lowered the “ purring ” call is
given. Ali (1964) gives the function of this call as a challenge to other
hens and to announce herself to a cock.

During the first breeding hen “A” developed a pendulous swelling
from the throat, which I thought might be due to the inflatable bulb of
the oesophagus and tracheal enlargement mentioned by Sutter (1964).
However, this swelling proved to be an enlargement of the crop.

Fig. 1. Posture and Movement — “Purring” Call.
Tiirnix suscitator

A harsh “ chook-chook ” was given by the cocks during fighting, or
when I entered the aviary after the chicks had hatched. The cock would
always threaten and rush in my direction, sometimes pecking at my feet.
Other vocalizations for T. suscitator are given in Trollope (1967).

Turnix sylvatica

With this species, the “ major ” vocal signal is a deep “ hoo-hoo-hoo-
hoo-hoo ” given only by the hen. The posture is also different from that
of T. suscitator , it would appear that the call is given when the hen is still,
the posture upright, the neck stretched and arched, the throat moving
and swelling with each note, the bill pointing towards the ground, but
neck and head are not lowered as with T. suscitator .

The function of this call is said to attract the cock (Whistler, 1963).
With the two pairs of T. sylvatica I watched, the hen would give this call
facing the direction of the cock’s position in the aviary. The cock would
answer with a sharp “ tuc-tuc-tuc ”, walk rapidly towards the hen, and
a lateral-lateral clumping position would be adopted, and often allo-
preening would take place. The hens would also respond to the cock’s
call with the “ hoo-hoo ” note, the cocks walking towards the hens.

224 J- TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES

Fig. 2. Posture and Movement — “Booming” Call.
Turnix sylvatica

Although in adjoining aviaries when a hen gave a call, this was not taken
up by the neighbouring hen, or at least only after such a time lag that
would suggest there was no “ challenge ” response. Other calls are a
kestrel-like high-pitched “ kee-kee-kee-kee ” given only by the cocks,
the situations in which this call has occurred suggesting it is an alarm note.
A low-pitched “ cree-cree-cree ” is given by both birds when in cover
and often in the lateral-lateral clumped position.

To summarize these notes on vocalizations, the most obvious point is
the great difference between the “ purring note ” of the hen T. suscitator
and the “ booming ” note of the hen T. sylvatica , together with the differ¬
ence in posture. The hen’s call note in T. tanki is similar to that of
T. suscitator (Ali, 1964). It would be interesting to see if they also have
the same posture, as sexual dimorphism in the female plumage of T.
suscitator and T. tanki , is more marked than in T. sylvatica.

Nesting

T. suscitator

Nests are usually a fairly well-made cup of whatever material was
available. Bits of dead weed, dried grass, green stems, dead convolvulusy
fine twigs, green and dead bits of irises and pine needles were all used at
times. On two occasions a canopy of stems were pulled out from a weed
pile, almost obscuring the sitting cock.

Both sexes took part in nest-building which was rapidly completed.
Material was pulled to the site with sharp jerks over the “ shoulder ”, the
partner in the nest pulling stems around with this same sharp jerk. The
cock spending more time in the nest than the hen. The pair would also
make stem-jerking movements without stems, this always happened when
one partner was in the nest pulling with real stems.

J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES 225

Egg-Rolling Behaviour

This has been described for T. suscitator in Trollope (1967) and has been
seen on other occasions, always performed by the hen.

Dust- and Sun-Bathing
T. suscitator and T. sylvatica

Dust-bathing was a “ social ” affair for both species, a hurried scuffling
writh the feathers fluffed out, alternate sides of the head and body being
rubbed on the ground. Somteimes a back kick with one leg would turn
the body round in a “ fixed pivot ”.

Sun-bathing was also social, usually a lateral-lateral clumping position
would be adopted, and then one bird would move a few inches away, fully
opening both wings simultaneously, so that the dorsal surfaces were
exposed to the sun. One-wing exposure was also seen, the bird lying on
its side.

Display of Hen

Turnix suscitator

Only once has a form of display been observed and this was brief. The
hen ran to the cock who was facing her and she then made a few rapid
steps to one side, then to the other, whilst the cock squatted. These
brief “ rushes ” were interspersed with the “ pivot turn ” also seen in
dust-bathing.

Body Sway

Turnix suscitator

This is a curious movement, the bird will be walking in a “ normal ”
manner, and suddenly stop, with the legs “ frozen ” in a stride. The body
is then swayed forwards and back, about three or four times, then loco¬
motion proceeds.

I have only seen hens make this movement. Dharmakumarsinji (1945)
mentions it and thinks it may be a leaf movement simulation, acting as
camouflage for the bird.

226 J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES

Discussion

The difficulties involved in carrying out field studies of birds such as
Hemipodes must be formidable. Studies in captivity also have the
problems of providing a suitable environment and sufficient space for
“ natural ” reproductive behaviour to occur. However, the fact that
three broods of T. suscitator were reared with the hen retaining a strong
pair bond with the cock, and tending the chicks, suggests that this may
happen in the wild.

The habitats of the genus are varied, Sutter (1964) lists arid or marshy
grass and brush country, savannas, and more open woodland. Whistler
(1963) records the habitat of T. sylvatica dussumier as cornfields and
stretches of grassy plain; although it can be found in any type of low
herbage and open scrub jungle.

T. sylvatica has a range extending from South-Western Europe, Africa
and Asia. T. suscitator has an extensive range in India and Eastern Asia.

With such varied habitats, it is possible that in some species of Turnix
the evolution of polyandry is such that the hen will fulfil a further role in
the reproductive pattern other than establishing a territory and laying the
eggs. This would occur if environmental pressures demand her addi¬
tional care for the chicks, to ensure their survival in “ borderline ”
conditions. Instead of following the “ normal ” pattern of a brief
association with a number of cocks, which terminates after a clutch of
eggs are laid, under “ optimum ” conditions.

In support of this theory of continued association by the hen with the
cock and chicks, we have the observations of Dharmakumarsinhji (1945).
It is interesting to note that when I described the first breeding and early
removal of the hen, as she had no interaction with the chicks, he was kind
enough to show interest, and wrote to me, remarking that the contrast
in the behaviour of T. suscitator in the wild and as then observed by me
in captivity was noteworthy.

Summary

The reproductive behaviour of captive T. suscitator is described, also
some preliminary observations on the behaviour of captive T. sylvatica .
The behaviour of T. suscitator in captivity suggests the possibility that
the female in the wild may help to rear chicks and retain a pair bond
with the male.

REFERENCES

Ali, S. 1955. The book of Indian birds. Bombay Nat . Hist. Society , Bombay .
Dharmakumarsinhji, K. S. 1945. The Bustard Quail at home. Avicult. Mag . j]
(5) 10 : 58-60.

Harrison, C. J. O. 1965. Plumage pattern and behaviour in the Painted Quail.
Avicult. Mag. 71 : 176-184.

Henry, G. M. 1955. A Guide to the Birds of Ceylon . (London: Oxford
University Press.)

J. TROLLOPE — BEHAVIOUR OF BARRED AND ANDALUSIAN HEMIPODES 227

Seth-Smith, D. 1903. On the breeding in captivity of Turnix tanki, with some
notes on the habits of the species. Avicult. Mag. (2) 1 : 317-324.
Seth-Smith, D. 1905. On the breeding of Turnix varia. Avicult. Mag. (2) 3 :
295-30I-

Sutter, E. R. 1964. Article “ Button Quail ”, in Thomson, A. L. ( ed .), New
Dictionary of Birds (London & New York).

Trollope, J. 1967. Breeding a Hemipode, Turnix suscitator. Avicidt Mag.
73 : 184-188.

Whistler, H. 1963. Popular Handbook of Indian Birds. (Edinburgh &
London: Oliver & Boyd.)

#

*

BREEDING THE STONECHAT, 1970

(Saxicola torquata)

By J. Doughty (Cannock, Staffordshire, England)

(This data was sent to ASPEBA by a member but in view of its detail was felt
to be of interest to a wider range of aviculturists.)

A pair of Stonechats, Saxicola torquata , was overwintered in an aviary
24 ft. x 7 ft. and 6 ft. 6 in. high. The birds were fed on maggots and
pupae and adult blowflies, and a mixture of Haith’s insectile food and
hard-boiled egg to which was added Vit-min mineral powder. As spring
wore on the diet was supplemented by insects which entered the aviary.

By February the cock began to display to the hen, which at times was
decidedly aggressive. The display consisted of sudden dashes at the hen
with out-stretched head, open beak, quivering wings and a display of
the white secondaries. The hen tended to dodge these onslaughts, but
on many occasions she stood her ground, whereupon the cock seemed to
dance around her uttering a series of squeaky notes. In all of this
courtship display the hen played a passive role, and only responded in a
high-spirited manner with jerking tail and flipping wings so typical of the
species. In between these ardent displays the cock sang from a high
position in the aviary; his song growing stronger as the spring progressed.

On the ioth April a bank was covered with grass clods and depressions
in the vegetation were made. Immediately these preparations had been
completed the cock entered and inspected at least four potential nesting
sites. Before entering he held his wings high in a quivering fashion
uttering an “ eurring ” noise very similar to that of the cock Bullfinch
when encouraging the hen to nest. When inside the hollow the cock
made a high-pitched warble. The hen often followed him down and
entered the sites chosen. It was noticed that in the nesting area the
roles were reversed and it was the hen who became dominant; the cock
always giving way to her in this area of their territory.

228

J. DOUGHTY — BREEDING THE STONECHAT, 1970

The hen eventually chose one of the sites inspected by the cock, which
was at the base of the slope and under a particular heavy clod. She
enlarged the chosen position and on the nth April she began the founda¬
tions of the nest; mainly using dead leaves, together with grass bents,
both fine and coarse rootlets, hair and other soft fibrous material. She
completed the nest on the 15th April.

During the nest-building operations the cock sang from his favourite
high perch above the nest ; but if the hen stayed in the nest for some time
he invariably flew down to investigate. Sometimes he would follow the
hen to the nest and seemed to stand watch on a bramble slightly above
the nest. It was also noticed that if the hen accidently dropped a piece
of material near to the site the cock removed it to the extremities of the
aviary. This tidying up operation on the part of the cock would seem
to be a protection measure against enemies, who might use such clues to
locate the nest. At times he also encouraged the hen to continue building
by flying by her in quick direct flight, carrying a piece of material, usually
dead bracken.

Throughout this period the birds showed no fear or resentment at my
presence; the hen often picking up nesting material from near my feet.
On my inspecting the nest no alarm was shown by either bird.

On the 17th April she began laying, and then on consecutive days until
April 22nd when a clutch of six was completed. However, she did not
begin incubation, and it was subsequently discovered that a cat had been
seen on top of the aviary, which may account for her desertion. Six days
later, when it was obvious that she had deserted the eggs, these and the
nest were removed.

On the 30th April she began building a second nest, but this time in a
depression near the top of the slope and by the 10th May she had completed
a clutch of five eggs. She began incubation on laying the fifth egg. The
only problem to arise during incubation was that of cats. On noticing a
cat, no matter the distance, the cock invariably called the hen off the nest
by using a high-pitched “whibbing ” note and flying across the nest-site
in fast direct flight. On 23rd May, between 2.00 and 6.00 p.m. four eggs
hatched and the fifth some time later.

For the first two days the cock fed the hen on the nest, who transferred
the food to the young ; she at no time for these days took food to the nest,
although when she came off to feed the cock would feed the young directly.
His favourite food at that time was the newly-emerged greenbottle fly,
which being soft and small seemed ideal. Fie also fed hard-boiled egg
to the hen and young, but for the most part rejected the fully developed
greenbottle and bluebottle, which he appeared to test for softness before
rejecting them. However, it was noticed that if more suitable foods were
not available he would then break up a bluebottle and feed the dismem¬
bered parts to the young.

On the third day the hen would often leave the nest after receiving

J. DOUGHTY — BREEDING THE STONECHAT, 1970

229

food from the cock, fly around the aviary, kill the offering and often add
to it herself and then return to the nest to feed the nestlings. This went
on until the eighth day although by now the hen was feeding the young
without any encouragement from the cock. The main food taken to the
nest from the fourth day consisted of bluebottles, but only those newly
emerged which were soft; maggots which they seemed to prefer rolled,
which softened their structure; hard-boiled egg, and pieces of grit and
cuttlefish bone. Both birds, but more especially the cock, would often
take a mixture of these foods to the chicks. By the 6th day large quantities
of these foods were being fed and the nestlings were encouraged to gape
by the adult birds making a “ clucking ” sound. They seemed to know
when the young birds had had enough, since on making this noise and
receiving no response the birds would eat the food themselves. I had
found that placing little piles of egg around the aviary and scattering
the “ rolled ” maggots about the aviary encouraged the birds to feed since
to find food they had to be more peripatetic and this was more akin to
conditions in the wild. However, by the eighth day large quantities of
the fully developed bluebottle were being fed, which was fortunate since
I had large numbers of these which were only allowed to escape from the
tin, one or two at a time, through a small aperture I had made — sur¬
prisingly, however, they still refused the fully-grown greenbottle.

On the 14th day the young birds began to stand outside the nest and on
the 1 6th day they left the nest and became dispersed in the vegetation.
It was now found there were four cocks and a hen; three of which were
large and vigorous, and two small and stunted, which died two days later
despite constant attention by both parents. When the birds were
twenty-three days old, although still being fed by the adults, they were
taken from the aviary, because by that time the hen had completed her
third nest and had laid two eggs of the clutch and it was felt that the cock
would soon decide his offspring were ready for independence, and his
attempts to demonstrate this to the young might have resulted in death
or injury to the young in the confines of an aviary. The young birds
were placed in a four-foot box-cage and were soon eating the soft food
and maggots which I had placed in one container.

By the 19th June the hen had laid her sixth egg (seventeenth in all) and
had begun incubation the day before. This third nest had been built
within nine inches of a Yellow Wagtail’s nest containing five eggs, and
this later presented an unlooked-for problem.

Two days before his own young hatched the cock Stonechat had become
frustrated by the delay in hatching of his own young, and had transferred
his affections to the yellow wagtails, whose large gapes poking out of the
vegetation he could not resist. Thus by the time his six young hatched
on the 2nd July he was spending all his time feeding the Yellow Wagtails,
and it was rather an amusing sight to see both wagtails and a Stonechat
feeding the young of the former; the hen Wagtail and Stonechat often

w

230

J. DOUGHTY — BREEDING THE STONECHAT, I970

being at the nest at the same time. Because of this strange turn of events
it was decided to transfer the young Wagtails (10 days old) and their
parents to a cage. Unfortunately in the confines of a cage the adults
fought viciously; they had even tended to be quarrelsome in the aviary.
The hen bird was removed, since it had been noticed in the aviary that
the cock Wagtail was more willing to feed soft food, and thus the cock
finished the task of rearing. Five beautiful young Wagtails left the nest
bowl on 7th July and began to feed themselves between ioth and nth July.

Meanwhile the cock Stonechat, now the distraction had been removed,
returned to his paternal duties. However, on the 5th July the six young
Stonechats died. This may have been due to the cock’s earlier confusion
but I believe the main reason was due to the absence of soft-bodied flies,
which had been available at the time of the successful rearing. This was
bad management on my part in not having a “ hatch ” of flies prepared
for this third nest. The Wagtails had been reared basically on the last
“ hatch ” of greenbottles I had prepared.

At the time of writing this report the cock Stonechat is still displaying
to the hen and encouraging her to nest. However, I hope that she resists,
as I believe she has done more than enough for one year.

# # #

BREEDING THE ALPINE CHOUGH
AT THE NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

(Pyrrhocorax g. graculus)

By Philip Wayre, Director (Great Witchingham, Norfolk, England)

Two pairs of Alpine Chough were purchased from a Continental dealer
in 1965. Both pairs were subsequently released in the larger of the two
walk-through aviaries in the Park. In the spring of 1968 one pair
constructed a substantial nest of sticks on top of a nest-box which had
been placed inside a large cavity in an artificial rock-work cliff. Unfor¬
tunately the eggs were stolen by some Azure-winged Magpies Cyanopica
cyanus cooki (Bonaparte) kept in the same aviary. Early in 1969 the
Magpies were removed and the two pairs of Choughs divided — one pair
remaining in the walk-through aviary and one pair being removed to a
large planted pheasant pen measuring 54 ft. in length and 27 ft. in width.
This pen has a wooden hut in it measuring 9 ft. x 6 ft. in floor area, and
the Choughs could enter it through a small hole at the top giving access
to an inside ledge. An open nest-box 12 in. square was placed in one
corner of the hut 6 ft. above the ground. The birds nested in the box
and hatched five chicks, one of which died after 14 days. The other four

PHILIP WAYRE — BREEDING THE ALPINE CHOUGH

231

1

chicks were removed and an attempt was made to hand-rear them, but
this failed. The pair remaining in the walk-through aviary did not
attempt to breed in 1969.

This year (1970) the pair in the pheasant aviary again built a nest of
twigs in the open nest-box and on 15th April it contained four eggs
which hatched on 1st May. Three young Choughs fledged on 23rd May,
but a month later one of them succumbed to gapes. The remaining two
are, at the time of writing (August), quite independent and their bills have
changed from dull greyish-brown to bright yellow. Their legs are also
beginning to acquire the reddish colour of the adult.

It was noticed that the parent birds became extremely selective in
their feeding when rearing young, and would take virtually nothing but
mealworms. These were fed ad lib. and at one stage were being consumed
at the rate of nearly half a pound daily. A high protein supplement in
the form of Casilan (Glaxo) was sprinkled over the mealworms every day.
The pair in the walk-through aviary nested twice during the spring of
1970; on the first occasion the eggs appeared to be infertile, but the
birds laid again and had four eggs on 15th June from which three young
hatched on 29th June. Two of the young died, possibly because the
adults were constantly disturbed by people passing through the aviary.
One young survived to fledge and has since become independent despite
the fact that it has one deformed toe.

As described above, the Alpine Chough, Pyrrhocorax g. graculus , has
been bred at the Norfolk Wildlife Park. It is believed this may be a
first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at
once with the Hon. Secretary.

232

GRENVILLE ROLES — BREEDING THE GREY TOURACO

BREEDING THE GREY TOURACO AT THE
JERSEY ZOOLOGICAL PARK

( Corythaixoides concolor concolor)

By Grenville Roles (Deputy Curator of Birds)

Alternatively known as “ Go- Away Birds ”, Grey Touracos inhabit the
dry thornbush country of Angola, stretching eastwards to Tanzania and
south to Cape Province. The birds in our collection came from the
vicinity of Luanda in Angola, being presented to the Zoo in May 1967.

Large grey birds with delicate hair-like crests, black bill and legs, our
Touracos are fed upon a mixed diet of all available fruits, offered chopped
and whole, and our basic bread, milk, multivitamin mixture together with
minced boiled egg, minced meat and meal worms. Fresh green branches
of Hawthorn are always available and the birds quickly strip these of
young leaves and buds. Convolvulus and Hebe ( Scrophulariaceae )
foliage are also readily taken.

The first signs of courtship activity took place in August 1969 after
the birds had been moved from their flight in the Tropical Bird House
to a very large outside aviary. Two pairs of birds were seen feeding each
other at this time and twigs were carried, though it seems with no definite
purpose. By the 9th August one of the pairs had become very aggressive,
chasing the other birds continuously. The chased birds were quickly
removed but beyond further twig-carrying no other breeding behaviour
was observed.

In the autumn all the birds were reunited in the Birdroom without
any aggression being shown. All were ringed at this time with differently
coloured celluloid rings.

On the 29th March this year one of the birds was seen tugging at small
twigs which had been left attached to their perches. A large quantity of
fine (thornless) Hawthorn and Oak twigs were scattered about over the
flight floor and a close watch maintained. Very quickly the female (as it
turned out to be) flew down to investigate and selected a Hawthorn twig,
which she carried up to a wire nesting platform about 7 ft. high, resting
upon the fork of a branch, and almost entirely hidden from view by a
conifer branch. The nest which she and her mate proceeded to build
was made entirely out of Hawthorn twigs, the Oak and various other bits
and pieces lying about were completely ignored.

The pair again became aggressive and started to chase the other
Touracos, which necessitated the latters’ removal from the aviary.

At 11.30 on the 9th April mating was observed for the first time and
again on the 18th and 28th April. Though the brooding pattern was
started on the 27th April, the female usually brooding overnight, with

Avicult. Mag.

Copyright ]

Grey Touraco ( Corythaixoides concolor concolor)
Parent Bird, 1970

[J. I. C. Mallinson

Avicult Mag.

Copyright ] Grey Touraco, 13 days old. Born 31 May, 1970 [J.J. C. Mallimon

GRENVILLE ROLES — BREEDING THE GREY TOURACO

233

very irregular “ change-overs ” in the day. The first egg was not laid
until the 1st May, the second and third following on alternate days.

A changeover ritual was frequently observed during the incubation
period of 28 days. The non-brooding bird on approaching the nest,
would shake its head vigorously, the brooding bird responding immedi¬
ately by shaking its head briefly and leaving the nest. Feeding of the
brooding bird by its mate sometimes took place at this time, the visitor
quickly taking the place of its mate upon the nest.

On the 29th May two chicks were observed in the nest, the third egg
hatching two days later on 3ist May. The last chick was removed from
the nest and examined. Its pink flesh was well covered with charcoal
grey down, the bill pink with a dark grey tip and the legs were greyish-pink
with grey feet. The inside of the mouth was bright pink, eyes were
opaque blue-grey with a white egg tooth and tiny white claws on the alula
were also seen. The chicks weight was 14 \ gms., its overall length 3 in.

For the first few days it appeared that the only food given to the young
was regurgitated greenfood, but when the smallest chick was 10 days old,
it was again removed and re-examined at which time it regurgitated three
large pellets (2 in. long weighing 4-6 gms.), which upon examination
revealed that the birds were being fed on greenfood, boiled egg and
raisins. At this time the chick weighed 71 gms. (before regurgitating
the pellets), had a tail about 1 in. long and was pretty well covered by
sprouting pin feathers.

At eighteen days old regurgitated banana was being fed to the young
and at 21 days old they left the nest (19th June) though they had been
climbing around the branches next to it for four days.

On 3rd July the chicks were seen eating Hawthorn leaves and two days
later were seen pecking at a whole (skinned) orange.

On 17th July the chicks were seen eating from the feed dishes and were
then considered to be self-supporting; though they continued to beg food
from their parents until 27th July when they were moved to another aviary.

At the time of writing the adults are again incubating a clutch of three,
the first egg being laid two days after the young were removed, 29th July.

As described above the Grey Touraco (Corythaixoides concolor concolor)
has been bred at the Jersey Zoological Park. It is believed this may be a
first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

234 CLIFFORD SMITH — BREEDING THE DOUBLE YELLOW-HEADED AMAZON

BREEDING THE DOUBLE YELLOW-HEADED

AMAZON

(Amazona ochrocephala oratrix)

By Clifford Smith (Denholme, Nr. Bradford, Yorkshire, England)

These two birds were purchased in 1966, newly imported and obviously
young birds as they had only a small amount of yellow on the front of the
head. Each year the amount of yellow on the head has increased so
that by 1970 the whole of the head and nape is completely yellow and they
are very handsome birds, the most colourful of the Amazons, in my
opinion. There is no difference in the colouring of the male and female,
each having red and yellow feathers on the wing butts. The difference
in head size has become more pronounced over the years and there is now
no difficulty in recognizing the cock by his broader beak and wider and
flatter head.

As it was summer when these birds arrived they were kept in the
birdroom for about a fortnight and then released into a 12 ft. longx 6 ft.
wide x 7 ft. high flight with a 6 ft. x 4 ft. shelter in the birdroom.

For the first winter they were encouraged to sleep in the shelter but
after that they prefered to roost outside, only using the shelter for feeding
and the afternoon siesta.

The flight is wooden framed and wired with 1 in. x 1 in. x 16 gauge
Twilweld but they have made no attempt to chew the woodwork or the
wire.

They are no more noisy than the Yellow Fronts and the Blue Fronts,
their outbursts being confined to probably 15 minutes morning and
evening.

The nest-box was introduced in 1969 and as a grandfather clock
nest box had proved successful with the Yellow Fronted Amazons in
1967 (Avicultural Magazine, November 1969), a similar type box
seemed to be the best approach.

Early in June the hen began to show interest in the box and soon a
small pile of excavated filling was seen on the floor of the flight below the
entrance hole. The hen then disappeared into the box and was only
occasionally seen for a short period in the evenings. She sat two eggs
very conscientiously for five weeks, when they were removed and proved
to be clear. Reference to previous breeding reports of my Yellow
Fronted Amazons and African Greys showed exactly the same results,
a trial run before the successful year.

So when the Double Yellows began preparing their nest in early May,
hopes were high that 1970 would confirm my observations.

The first egg was laid on 7th May, followed by another three within
the week. Incubation commenced with the first egg and after two weeks

CLIFFORD SMITH — BREEDING THE DOUBLE YELLOW-HEADED AMAZON 235

a quick inspection, while the hen was in the shelter feeding, showed that
the eggs appeared fertile although they were not handled at that stage.

The sound of the young being fed was first heard on the 5th June but
no opportunity to inspect presented itself until the 14th June, when two
chicks and two eggs were seen.

The young were covered with grey down. Very little was heard from
the log after the first week. The birds were inspected each week as
conditions allowed; and each time saw quick growth and the appearance
of feathers, the yellow on the forehead soon becoming visible. They left
the nest on the 5th August within an hour of each other and are now
feeding on their own.

The young are perfectly feathered and strong on the wing.

Their colouring is all green with a patch of yellow about the size of a
shilling on the forehead; no colouring to the wing butts or wings; a white
beak and white feet, and dark brown eyes.

They were fed the same diet as the Yellow Fronts, normal dry seed
of sunflower, safflower, hemp, wheat and oats in the shelter, but soaked
seed as above thrown on the floor of the flight. A shortage of chickweed
due to dry conditions was balanced by extra dandelion, groundsel and
later by persicaria and sow-thistle.

Apple, grapes and peanuts were offered; but only taken after the
soaked seed and green food had been cleared. All the Amazons love a
slice of orange but this is fed very sparingly.

Each end of the flight is covered for a distance of 3 ft. and the adults
and young all roost together at one end; and as the young Yellow Fronts
have slept out through the winters in previous years, unless they show any
signs of discomfort the Double Yellows will be allowed to do the same.
The above dates would suggest an incubation period of 21 to 24 days with
approximately 70 days in the nest-box after hatching and three to four
weeks to independence. The longer the period the young are left with
the parents the greater seems to be the advantage, as they appear to make
quicker pi ogress.

As described above, Mr. Clifford Smith has bred the Double Yellow¬
headed Amazon, Amazona ochrocephala oratrix. It is believed that this
may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

236 ALAN LENDON - THE BREEDING OF THE CORELLA

THE BREEDING OF THE CORELLA
(LONG-BILLED OR SLENDER-BILLED
COCKATOO)

( Cacatua ( Licmetis ) tenuirostris)

By Alan Lendon (Adelaide, Australia)

The true Corella is a cockatoo with a moderately restricted habitat
which may well be contracting in the face of pastoral development. Its
present stronghold is the western district of the State of Victoria, from
the vicinity of Port Phillip Bay (on rare occasions nowadays) to the South
Australian border, which it transgresses for a short distance, especially in
the vicinity of Naracoorte and Penola. The range in New South Wales
has never been precisely defined but it is known to occur, somewhat
sparsely, in the Riverina district and along the course of the Lachlan and
Murrumbidgee Rivers. In my youth, the Sydney birdshops invariably
had nestling Corellas for sale at the appropriate season, presumably
obtained within the State, but the source was never reliably disclosed.

The Corella, with its elongated upper mandible which is an adaptation
for digging up bulbs, is obviously closely related to the much commoner
and more widespread Little Corella or Bare-eyed Cockatoo (C. sanguined)
but, as far as I have been able to ascertain, the two species do not make
contact. In Western Australia, the form known as pastinator , which
lacks the red crescent on the throat, was originally considered a valid
species and was later regarded as a subspecies of tenuirostris and has more
recently still been treated as a subspecies of sanguinea. This bird is
sparsely distributed nowadays in the south-west corner of the State and
is more plentiful north of Perth along the coastal strip, coming in contact
with sanguinea at the northern extremity of its range, in the vicinity of
Geraldton, and reputedly interbreeding.

I had always been attracted to this somewhat grotesque looking species
but had never possessed a specimen, although it is not uncommon as a
cagebird and reputedly an excellent talker. In December 1967, my elder
son arrived home with a pair of these birds which he had obtained from
a mixed collection of parrots and cockatoos exhibited at a service station,
with the story that they had attempted to breed and had actually laid
eggs during the previous season. A less likely breeding pair at first
acquaintance could hardly be imagined; the cock being very timid and
unable to fly on account of a damaged wing and the hen being obviously
hand-reared, tame and with a strong tendency to human fixation and a
repertoire consisting of a monotonously repeated “ Hello Cocky ”,
However, they appeared to be well-mated and frequently indulged in
mutual preening.

They were released in an aviary with a flight 12J ft. x 3J ft. x 7 ft.
covered with one-inch mesh chain wire and with a shelter at the rear

Avicult. Mag.

Copyright ]

[Alan Lendon

Slender-billed Cockatoo

ALAN LENDON — THE BREEDING OF THE CORELLA

237

measuring 5I ft. x 3 J ft. x 8 ft. ; the cock being provided with a perch
which enabled him to clamber into the shelter.

In August 1968, they were supplied with a hollow log about five feet
long with an internal diameter of about six inches and an inspection hole
near the lower end. This was suspended obliquely in the shelter and in
close proximity to a perch to enable easy access on the part of the cock.

An immediate interest was evinced and the hen spent a considerable
amount of time in it from the start. From this time onward, mating was
frequently observed and the first egg was seen on 22nd September and
the second on the following day; it was not until four days later that a
further opportunity to inspect the nest occurred and revealed a third egg ;
it is to be presumed that they were laid with either two or three day inter¬
vals between each. Incubation appeared to commence with the second
egg and as is the case with most cockatoos (excluding the “ blacks ”) the
cock carried out the task for most of the day and the hen in the early
morning, late afternoon and at night. Two of the eggs were fertile and
the first hatched on 16th October and the second the following day, after
an incubation period of approximately 24 days. One of the chicks,
presumably the younger, died after about a week but the other flourished
and ultimately left the nest on 10th December, approximately seven weeks
after hatching. It flew well from the start but was appreciably smaller
than the parents, with a considerably shorter upper mandible and a
slightly less obvious red crescent on the upper chest. Although both
parents fed the young bird whilst it was in the nest, after it emerged the
hen rarely did so but the cock continued to do so on demand for several
weeks, although the youngster fed itself and was deemed independent
after about three weeks. Soon after this the cock developed an aversion
to the hen and pursued her relentlessly around the aviary; fortunately
for her he was unable to catch up with her on account of his flightlessness.

The food supplied consisted of a seed mixture of sunflower seed,
hulled oats and canary seed. In addition, a plentiful supply of nutweed
(Romulea rosed) was given, together with thistle and seeding grasses.
An occasional peanut was relished.

The young bird soon became quite tame and would take a peanut from
the fingers, as the hen had always done. At about the same stage it
became very noisy and the parents, who had always indulged in a pre¬
roosting screeching session, somewhat increased their vocal propensities,
so I presented them to the Adelaide Zoo, where they were satisfactorily
housed and it is to be hoped that they will continue to breed and add to
that institution’s already long list of psittacine successes. However,
although eggs were laid in 1969, no results were obtained.

At about the same time, I borrowed a tame bird, of unknown sex, as
a companion for the young bird but it proved ill at ease in an aviary and
unwilling to fly, in addition to appearing terrified of the youngster. This
condition lessened somewhat after a time but they never really became

238

ALAN LENDON — THE BREEDING OF THE CORELLA

friendly and after several weeks, the young bird still being very noisy,
I sent them both to the owner of the tame bird, and they now occupy an
aviary with several others of the species.

I was quite unable to sex the young bird with any certainty in the early
stages although I had a feeling that it was probably a hen; later I was not
so sure but looking at it again when it was about a year old I felt that the
original opinion was correct. This species is one of the cockatoos which
does not exhibit any difference in the colour of the iris and although the
sexes can be picked in a mated pair, I think it is pure guesswork in the case
of a single bird.

I had not been able to find any convincing record of the previous
breeding of this species in captivity other than those in the San Diego Zoo
in 1959 and i960 and I had suspected that the young might have been
partly hand-reared, as is often the case there; however, Mr. K. C. Lint
informs me that this was not so. Following publication of a brief account
of my success in Bird Keeping in Australia a correspondent reported the
outstanding achievement of Mrs. C. Pullan of Wellington, New Zealand,
whose birds successively reared one, two, two and three young in the
years 1965 to 1968.

BREEDING THE LESSER SULPHUR-CRESTED
COCKATOO

By Clifford Smith (Denholme, Yorkshire, England).

My Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoos, Cacatua sulphurea sulphurea ,
were purchased in 1962, the cock having been a pet bird which had
become too playful with its beak, hence the reason for selling. A few
months elapsed after I bought him before a hen was obtained, for cockatoos
were not too plentiful at this time. The male has jet black eyes and the
hen’s are reddish-brown. Apart from the eye colour there is no other
obvious difference either in colour or size.

Over the years the birds were kept in the same aviary, 12 x 5 x 7 ft. high,
and various nest-boxes were introduced, but although they visited the
boxes occasionally they never made any attempt to breed. However, in
1969 after the young Citron-crested Cockatoos which were in the next
flight to the Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoos left the nest, there appeared
to be more than the usual amount of bickering and so it was decided to
give them a move.

A 20 x4 ft. flight was made available and early in 1970 a natural log
2 feet in diameter and only 2 ft. 6 ins. high, resting on a concrete paving slab
supported on a 4 foot post was fixed in the flight with no overhead cover.
The log was an open cylinder resting on the concrete slab, with a layer of

C. SMITH — BREEDING THE LESSSER SULPHUR-CRESTED COCKATOO 239

peat and rotted wood in the bottom, a slab of wood on the top, and a
square entrance hole near the top with a projecting perch just below it.
Owing to various factors such as fixing the log, and its shape, there was
no alternative but to have it with the entrance facing east.

The birds soon settled down in the new aviary but it was not until
1 st June that the hen disappeared into the box; although she had been
making numerous visits for a month before that. She was not seen for
a week, so it was assumed that she was incubating. The cock visited the
nest-box to feed her, and although she was seen out for short periods
during the second week, no chance was given to make an inspection.
As the walls of the log were nearly 6 inches thick it had been impossible
to make an inspection door, so that when the absence of the hen allowed
a quick look to be taken, it had to be through the entrance hole. This
revealed eggs, but only a quick glance was possible since the cock was
attacking fiercely, and any further disturbance seemed pointless.

At the end of June, although no sound of feeding had been heard, the
cock was continually in and out of the log and his breast feathers were
matted and wet after each visit, which is usually a sign that young are
being fed. As well as the usual supply of dry seed in the shelter, large
quantities of soaked sunflower, safflower, wheat and oats were thrown
onto the floor of the flight. In addition what chickweed was available,
together with dandelion roots, leaves and seeding heads were fed twice
each day. The birds showed no interest in fruit or nuts but took some
stale bread soaked in honey.

A youngster left the nest on 30th August but it was another week
before the second one appeared. They were exact replicas of their
parents and only slightly smaller, and were able to fly the full length of
the aviary within minutes. They are now completely independent but
will remain with their parents as long as possible.

Five pairs of cockatoos have reared young this year, along with two
pairs of Amazons and two pairs of Grey Parrots, making it a very satis¬
factory season. There appear to have been only two things different from
in previous years; firstly a very hot dry summer which does not seem to
have favoured parakeet breeding up and down the country, and secondly
my introduction of natural logs as nest-boxes, standing on concrete
slabs and raised well above the ground. As concrete does retain moisture
has this helped to keep the interiors at the right humidity to help with
the hatching? The cockatoos have had a choice of various nest-boxes,
but all have chosen the natural logs.

As described, Mr. C. Smith has bred the Lesser Sulphur-crested
Cockatoo Cacatua sulphured sulphured. It is believed this may be a
first success. Any member or reader knowing of a precious breeding of
this species in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communi¬
cate at once with the Hon. Secretary.

24°

PHILIP WAYRE — BREEDING THE AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

BREEDING THE AZURE-WINGED MAGPIE
AT THE NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

( Cyanopica cyanus cooki )

By Philip Wayre, Director (Great Witchingham, Norfolk, England)

Six Azure-winged Magpies were received from a Continental Zoo as
part of an exchange agreement in 1966. Some difficulty was experienced
in determining the sexes of the birds, but an attempt was made to divide
them into three pairs. This was successful in at least one case, since one
pair kept in a large planted pheasant aviary built a nest and laid eggs,
which proved to be infertile, in 1968. The second pair built a nest but
no eggs were laid. What was believed to be a male of the third pair
escaped at Easter of that year and has remained at liberty in the Park ever
since. It seems to have a comparatively small territory and during the
winter it is often seen feeding from the wild boars’ feeding-trough in
their enclosure not far away and it has also been observed to feed its mate
with grubs through the wire-netting of the aviary. Various attempts have
been made to re-capture this bird but so far none has proved successful,
as it is not only intelligent, but extremely suspicious of any form of trap.

In 1969 both pairs nested again, the same pair producing eggs which
once again proved to be infertile. The second pair did not lay.

Early in 1970 it was decided to split the birds and the hen which had
laid was mated with the larger of the two birds in the other pair. This
re-shuffle was successful in that the pair built a nest amongst the fir
boughs attached to a support post 7 ft. above the ground in the aviary.
The nest contained four eggs on 24th May and they hatched on 8th June.
The four young fledged and were seen flying around the aviary on 2nd
July. Unfortunately one was subsequently killed by a weasel, but the
remaining three have survived and are now quite independent of their
parents.

These birds are normally fed a mixture of pheasant starter crumbs and
insectivorous food with a liberal supply of maggots and meahvorms.
When rearing young they appeared to feed them exclusively on mealworms
which were sprinkled daily with Casilan (Glaxo) to supply additional
protein.

JOHN BUNKER — BREEDING THE ORNATE LORIKEET

24I

BREEDING THE ORNATE LORIKEET

( Trichoglossus ornatus)

By John Bunker (Ettington, Warwickshire, England)

In July 1969 I obtained a pair of Ornate Lorikeets which had been
imported some twelve months previously, the birds were very active
although one of them had only stumps of flight feathers in one wing and,
as they were in an aviary and were very wild, this bird had damaged the
extremity of the clipped wing through heavy landings. The plumage of
both birds was not in the best condition, but they looked a pair and so
they found their way into my collection.

They were released in a flight 8 ft. x 2 ft. x 6 ft. where they spent the
summer and autumn. A parrakeet-type nest-box was installed and the
birds took immediate possession, the hen roosting inside the box with the
cock at the entrance hole ; however, nothing of any note happened except
that, with the assistance of a varied diet and constant bathing facilities,
the birds’ plumage improved tremendously and by October both birds
were in splendid condition and could fly normally.

At the end of November they were transferred to winter quarters and
were housed in an all- wire flight-cage 4 ft. long x 2 ft. wide x 3 ft. high.
In February of this year a nest-box was placed on the floor of the cage
with a view to getting the birds accustomed to it prior to their transference
to an outdoor aviary, its dimensions were 15 in. high x 9 in. x 9 in. with
a 2J in. diameter entrance hole and a perch. The base was covered to a
depth of 3 in. with a mixture of peat, soil and wood chippings, dampened
and rammed down tightly. The box was investigated almost immediately
and from then on both birds roosted in it.

Some three weeks later the birds were seen mating and the cock was
feeding the hen regularly, the box was examined about a week later, but
the only sign of any nesting activity was a minor excavation in one corner.

During the third week of April the hen was conspicuous by her absence
and as soon as anyone approached the cage the cock dived into the box.
This was examined much to the birds’ consternation and was found to
contain two white eggs, roughly the size and shape of those of the Eastern
Rosella. They had assumed the chalky-white appearance of fertile eggs
and hopes were high for a successful hatching. As the atmosphere was
very dry the floor of the cage was moistened daily.

The hen was observed out of the box more regularly during early May,
but as the birds were still highly nervous and suspicious of any interference
in their domestic routine the box was not examined again until young
were heard clamouring for food. Upon examining the box on the 28th
May two young were found and were estimated to be about two weeks old,
at this stage thev had only a sparse covering of white down. They were

242

JOHN BUNKER — BREEDING THE ORNATE LORIKEET

not examined closely but, perhaps surprisingly, the nest-box was quite
dry and sweet and still contained the egg shells.

Increasing amounts of food were being consumed, the staple diet being
a mixture of sugar, Farlene, Complan, honey, condensed milk, Bovril and
Abidec, this being diluted with boiling water. It was supplemented with
sweet apple, ripe banana, stale sponge cake, green ears of wheat and
gentles, all of these were taken with equal avidity. The birds had
continued through this period to make full use of the bathing facilities,
sometimes bathing several times daily. Both birds spent long periods
in the nest-box and both took all of the above-mentioned foods. The
cock was not seen to feed the hen after the young had hatched.

The box was subsequently examined on the 6th June when the young
were seen to have grown considerably and were clothed in dense white
down. On the 14th June they were still down-covered but pin feathers
were very noticeable on their heads and backs. The young clamoured
regularly for food at this period, even late at night, and the parents were
naturally consuming large quantities of food.

The young were again examined on the 26th June and their growth was
very noticeable, their plumage had also developed considerably. Due to
my being absent from the 27th June to the 10th July the young were
not examined again until the latter date when they were found to be fully
feathered, with tails as long as those of the adults and with only minimal
vestiges of down.

The only really noticeable difference between the young and the adult
birds was that the plumage of the young was slightly duller, their irises
were black instead of the orange of the adults, and their bills were almost
black as against the orange-yellow bills of their parents. I was quite
surprised to find the young still in the nest-box at this late date.

The elder of the young left the box for the first time on the 18th July,
being followed by the younger on the 21st July. Even after they had
left the box both the young and the adults spent a lot of time in it and
would retreat to it with the minimal provocation.

The young were seen to be feeding themselves on the 30th July, and
were independent of the parents by the 2nd August.

As described above, Mr. John Bunker has bred the Ornate Lorikeet
( Trichoglossus ornatus). It is believed this may be a first success.

Any member or reader knowing of a previous breeding of this species
in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once
with the Hon. Secretary.

H. MURRAY — BREEDING THE FAWN-NAPED TANAGER

243

BREEDING THE FAWN-NAPED TANAGER

By H. Murray (Brentwood, Essex, England)

I have bred the Fawn-naped Tanager, Tangara ruficervix leucotis , this
summer, and the young birds are now moulting into adult plumage.

These birds, which were imported from Equador last year, are mainly
blue in colour with a fawn patch at the back of the head. They are
roughly the size of a sparrow.

As usual with Tanagers, they became extremely belligerent when
pairing, and as there is no sexual difference in colour it is very difficult
to see which bird is paired to which, and the first definite sign that one
usually has, unless you happen to be there at the crucial moment, is a
badly battered bird if there are more than a pair of the same tanager in
the aviary. This fighting does not seem to extend much beyond their
own variety, but should a battle take place it is short and deadly. The
trouble is that Tanagers are so quick in their movements. Out of the
breeding season they are reasonably peaceful.

The nest, built in an angle of a wood frame was about the flimsiest I
have known, and the usual Tanager clutch — two eggs — was laid. Like
most birds that have had little contact with man in the wild, they are
fearless sitters, but as the weather was warm at the time the hen left the
nest for so long that I was very surprised that the eggs hatched. I
cannot give much information on length of incubation, but it was about
14 days. The young were in the nest for nearly three weeks.

I have always been interested to try to find out if these small tanagers
feed by regurgitation or not, and I feel reasonably sure that these birds
did so in part. Certainly such flies as were caught were fed whole, but I
think that some food was fed by regurgitation — fruit and sucked-out
mealworms.

The plumage of the young birds was dull blue, dark on the head, lighter
on the back, with a greyish-blue breast. No trace of the fawn nape was
apparent.

As described above Mr. H. Murray has bred the Fawn-naped Tanager
( Tangara ruficervix leucotis). It is believed this may be a first success.

Any member knowing of a previous breeding of this species in Great
Britain or Northern Ireland is requested to communicate at once with
the Hon. Secretary.

244 P* WAYRE — BREEDING SEASON 1970 AT NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

BREEDING SEASON 1970
AT THE NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK

Bv Philip Wayre, Director (Great Witchingham, Norfolk, England)

Two hundred and eighty-four birds of 41 species have been bred in
the Park this season. Apart from the commoner European forms,
waterfowl bred include 17 Emperor, seven Red-breasted, four Ashy¬
headed, four Ruddy-headed and six Cereopsis Geese. Ducks include
seven Baikal Teal, seven Canvasback and five European Eider reared.

The Baikal Teal were hatched from eggs laid by a pair bred in the Park
in 1966. They are kept on the largest pool which has an area of more than
three-quarters of an acre of water.

The following is a list of birds, other than waterfowl, bred and surviving
to independence.

Kestrel 5

Stone Curlew 4

Collared Dove 2

Barn Owl 4

Snowy Owl 1

Eagle Owl 9

Little Owl 6

Skylark 2

Pied Wagtail 4

Azure-winged Magpie 4
Alpine Chough 4

Blackbird 2

Song Thrush 3

Mistle Thrush 8

Chaffinch 1

Greenfinch 3

Goldfinch 7

The five young Kestrels were produced by the pair which reared one
youngster last year.

The Stone Curlews, all of which are pinioned and kept in the wader
pool produced no less than 1 1 eggs. Of these, four proved to be infertile,
two contained dead-in-shell chicks, and five hatched. One youngster
died from an unhealed navel and the remaining four were successfully
reared.

It is not possible to leave the eggs under the parent Stone Curlews since
they are nearly always stolen by Jackdaws. The procedure has been to
remove the eggs after they have been incubated for seven or eight days
and hatch them under broody bantams. Immediately after hatching the
young chicks are placed without the bantam in an electrically-heated coop
and for the first two or three days they are force-fed with maggots and
meal worms every two hours. After this period they learn to pick up
food for themselves, though they will still take it from the hand whenever
it is offered to them.

The nine young Eagle Owls brings the total to be bred in the Park to
47 since i960. Of these, 18 have been presented to the Swedish Conserva¬
tion Authorities at Skansen to help their scheme to re-establish this
species in the wild in Sweden, while a further four birds have been

Avicult, Mag.

Stone Curlew Chick

Avicult. Mag.

Copyright]

Two young Stone Curlews

[Philip Way re

P. WAYRE — BREEDING SEASON 1970 AT NORFOLK WILDLIFE PARK 245

presented to the German Conservation Authorities who are responsible
for a similar reintroduction project in the Eifel area of Germany.

The one Snowy Owl to be bred was the sole survivor of four chicks
hatched by a female Eagle Owl. This bird has no mate but is a prolific
egg-producer and since our female Snowy Owl refuses to rear her own
chicks, it was decided to substitute the Eagle Owl’s eggs with those of the
Snowy Owl. The Eagle Owl is a much earlier breeder, but by removing
her eggs this particular bird was induced to go on laying until she produced
a clutch at the same time as the Snowy Owl. Two of the four chicks
survived for more than a fortnight, then the smaller was discovered
headless, and as a safety measure the remaining chick was removed and
reared by hand. It is now fully fledged and very tame.

Both the Alpine Chough and the Azure-winged Magpie may be the
first of their species bred in captivity in Britain, and separate accounts of
their breeding occur elsewhere.

* * #

SOME AVIARY NOTES, 1970

By K. A. Norris (Purley, Surrey, England)

For the second year running my Flame-headed Barbets, Capito
bourcierii , raised my hopes and may yet add to my “ firsts ” this season.
Last year they drilled a perfect nesting hole in a rotten tree-stump and
the hen became rather ‘ puffy ’ and obviously on the point of laying.
Then they suddenly deserted the tree-stump and I found that mice had
taken over. Later they returned to the nesting-hole and worked on it
with such enthusiasm that they went straight through the bottom, having
excavated to a depth of over two feet. Incidentally they did not leave a
single wood-chip in the vicinity of the stump. They took it in turns to
excavate, each working for between five to ten minutes and then emerging
with a beak and throat full of chips which they carried to the far end of
the house and there dumped it from a high perch.

This spring I supplied them with a partly rotten tree-trunk about eight
inches in diameter and four feet high, which I stood upright in the centre
of a small pool where I hope mice will not reach it. Recently they have
taken to this new stump and starting at a point where a branch had
broken off, drilled inwards and then downwards in the exact centre.
They have worked on this continuously for nearly a week (it is still hard
wood in the centre) and have reached a depth of about eighteen inches;
at which depth they have enlarged the shaft, which is little more than an
inch in diameter, into a circular chamber about three inches in diameter.
The hen again looks to be on the point of laying and the cock is constantly
fussing round her and feeding her with mealworms and apple; “ tuk,
tuk, tuk ”, tuking to her just like a bantam hen calling chicks to food
she has found for them. I am keeping my fingers crossed.

x

246

SOME AVIARY NOTES, 1970

Black-spotted Barbets, Capito nigery also gave promising signs. They
have a partly hollow tree-trunk which they have used as a roosting place
for the past two years and this summer the cock became very attentive
until the hen was obviously about to lay, which she eventually did — from
a perch ! !

A pair of Orange-headed Ground Thrushes, Geokichla citrina , which
reared three nice youngsters, two cocks and a hen, last year, have hatched
five successive nests of three each this season but went to nest so soon
after rearing the first three that the second and third rounds were hatched
before the first were independent. I am certain that the oldest youngsters
were responsible for picking their younger brothers and sisters out of the
nest when they were still quite small, and while the hen had left the nest
to feed, for I found them scattered about the aviary one by one, all very
dead. The same nest was used for each brood and by the time that the
fourth clutch was laid had become very delapidated, tipped partly on
its side and so much flattened that it was little more than a platform with
a slight depression in the centre. The fourth set of chicks were reared
until they began to move about in the nest, whereupon one after another
went overboard. I then tried to prop up the nest with a wad of grass
pushed under it, but I could not remould it or make the depression any
deeper. The hen actually laid the first egg of her fifth clutch whilst I
was collecting more material for tempoiary repairs; so I had to leave the
job unfinished. However, what work I had managed to do seemed to be
effective, and the fifth brood were progressing well and had reached the
stage where they could stand on the edge of the nest and I really thought
they would be fully reared. Came a heavy rain-storm during the night
and the nest finally collapsed, I found three miserable and saturated little
corpses on the ground next morning.

As if the old birds had deliberately held back their moult and could
now wait no longer, they literally fell to bits — to such an extent that for
some time they were completely unable to fly, having dropped all their
primaries at once. They are recovering equally fast, but it is sad to think
of so much wasted effort — only three reared out of a possible fifteen.
Incidentally this pair have been in my possession since 1965 and I had never
heard the cock sing until this spring, when he had competition from the
two young cocks reared last year, which were in a nearby aviary. During
the early spring the chorus of these three birds was so magnificent that I
could not resist spending some time each evening just listening to their
evensong.

My young Rufous-bellied Bulbul, Hypsipetes mcclellandii, is
now assuming full adult plumage and although he takes his fill at the food
table each morning he is still ready to accept the odd tit-bit offered by the
parents occasionally. These birds also laid a second clutch very soon
after the first youngster left the nest, and incubated long beyond the
normal period of fourteen days, but the eggs were infertile. During the

SOME AVIARY NOTES 1970

247

whole of this long period the first-nest youngster was allowed to sit on the
edge of the nest, the old cock bringing food to it and the sitting hen at
the same time. The results of the 1970 breedings are not very impressive,
but it has its points of interest — and there is still the possibility that the
barbets may lay. They are in my small tropical house, so they will not
suffer from the deteriorating weather conditions at this late time of year.

# # *

COUNCIL MEETING

A Council Meeting was held on 4th September, 1970, at the Windsor
Hotel, Lancaster Gate, London, W.2.

The following Members were present: Mr. J. J. Yealland, Vice-
President, in the Chair. Mr. J. O. D’eath, Mr. D. Goodwin, Mr. H.
Horswell, Mr. K. A. Norris, Mr. C. M. Payne, Mr. D. H. S. Risdon,
Mrs. K. M. Scamell, Mr. D. T. Spilsbury and Mr. A. A. Prestwich, Hon.
Secretary.

The Society’s Medal

The Society’s Medal was awarded to Mrs. Brenda Rhodes, for breeding
the Black-tailed Conure Pyrrhura melanura , in 1970.

Certificate of Merit

The Society’s Certificate of Merit was awarded to :

The Winged World, for breeding the Little Bee-eater Merops pusillus ,
in 1970.

The Winged World, for breeding the Southern Tree Pie Dendrocitta

leucog aster, in 1969.

The Winged World, for breeding the Brown-throated Barbet Tricholaema
melanocephalum stigmatothorax , in 1969.

The Winged World, for breeding the Yellow-breasted Fruit Pigeon
Ptilinopus occipitalis , in 1969.

Election of Council Members
There were the following retirements and appointments :

Mrs. K. M. Scamell, Mr. A. V. Marques and Mr. P. L. Wayre retired
according to rule. Mr. D. T. Spilsbury retired at his own request.

Professor J. R. Hodges, Mr. S. T. Johnstone, and Dr. S. B. Kendall
were elected to fill the vacancies.

Hon. Life Members

Mr. T. T. Barnard and Dr. Satya Churn Law were elected Hon. Life
Members, in recognition of their long association with the Society.

Arthur A. Prestwich,

Hon. Secretary.

248

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS’ CLUB

BRITISH AVICULTURISTS5 CLUB

The one hundred and fourth Meeting of the Club was held at the
Windsor Hotel, Lancaster Gate, London, W.2, on Friday, 4th September,
1970, following a Dinner at 7.30 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. K. A. Norris.

Members of the Club present: Mrs. D. E. Balcon, A. W. Bolton,
R. A. Chester, J. O. D’eath, Mrs. W. Duggan, R. T. Harvey, H. Horswell,
P. Howe, #H. J. Indge, Dr. S. B. Kendall, H. G. Kenyon, J. Kuttner,
R. T. Kyme, C. Marler, C. M. Payne, #A. A. Prestwich, Mrs. M. Reay,
D. M. Reid-Henry, K. M. Scamell, Mrs. K. M. Scamell, W. M. H.
Williams, J. J. Yealland.

* Denotes Founder Member.

Members of the Club present, 23; guests, 10.

The Dinner was followed by a Conversazione.

The date of the next Meeting is Friday, 20TH November, 1970.

Arthur A. Prestwich,

Hon. Secretary.

# # *

NEWS AND VIEWS

Members will be pleased to hear that Dr. Jean Delacour celebrated his
80th birthday on 26th September, 1970.

# # *

Professor J. R. Hodges, 1970, successfully reared 19 Blue- winged
Grass Parrakeets from seven pairs, and 13 Splendids from eight pairs.

Peter Scott has been awarded the Albert Gold Medal of the Royal
Society of Arts for 1970, for his outstanding work in conserving wildlife.

# # #

David Spilsbury reports: “ My total number of parrakeets bred during
1970 was 42. The species reared were Barraband’s, Pennant’s, Golden-
mantled Rosella, Turquoisine, Splendid and Blue- winged Grass
Parrakeet.

NEWS AND VIEWS

249

At the close of the XV World Conference of the International Council
for Bird Preservation, held in the Netherlands in September, 1970, Miss
P. Barclay-Smith was presented with the Delacour Medal “ for services
to conservation, aviculture and ornithology ”, In October Miss
Barclay-Smith was awarded the Gold Medal of the Svenska Kvinnors
Djurskyddsforening (Swedish Women’s Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals) “ for her wonderful work, during a long period of
years, for the prevention of oil pollution of the sea”.

* * *

On Easter Sunday Rae Anderson was bitten on the hand by a 4^ ft.
Red Rattle Snake. It is good to hear that he is making a slow but sure
recovery. We certainly wish him well.

# * #

T. Driver reports the Loriinae breeding results, 1970, in the Kelling
Park Aviaries: 2 Mitchell’s Lorikeets, 2 Edwards’s, 2 Forsten’s and 4
Blue-headed Trichoglossus haematod caeruleiceps. The Purple-capped
Lories failed to rear their young. Unmated Black-capped Lory and Mrs.
Johnstone’s Lorikeet laid.

* * #

The new bird house at the Tracy Aviary, Salt Lake City, Utah, costing
some $150,000, has been named the “ Calvin Wilson Bird Pavilion ”, in
honour of our Life Member who has been Director of the Tracy Aviary
since its beginning in 1939.

* * #

Last year two young Red-masked Conures Aratinga erythrogenys
were reared in the Chester Zoological Gardens. The parents have this
year reared a nest of three. The young are now about the same size as
the parents but have not yet fully developed the characteristic red
markings.

* * #

Professor Dr. B. Grzimek reports a possible first success in the Zoologi-
schen Garten, Frankfurt am Main. He writes: “ This summer, we were
successful in breeding Creatophora cinerea (African Wattled Starling).
Three young ones from one brood left the nest and have grown up so far
without any difficulty ”.

250

NEWS AND VIEWS

E. Norgaard-Olesen, Janderup, Denmark: “ My breeding results this
year are one Philippine Hanging Parrakeet, just out of the nest; two
Vernal Hanging Parrakeets ready to leave the nest; one Blue-naped
Mousebird, and three Rain Quail. The Blue-crowned Hanging Parrakeets
nested on the ground, one young living for three days

Clifford Smith’s breeding successes with his parrots and cockatoos, :
1970: Leadbeater’s Cockatoo, five young (three from one pair, two from
another); Citron-crested, one young; Lesser Sulphur-crested, two; White-
crested, one; Yellow-fronted Amazon, one; Double Yellow- headed Ama¬
zon, two; African Grey, four (three from one nest, one from another).

* # #

Jeffrey Trollope: “ I have had two broods (three in each brood) of
Barn Owls, fully reared. Last year was a disaster, the only creatures
breeding were dozens of healthy, sleek mice. This spoilt my chances of
breeding the Button Quail Turnix sylvatica and everything else! Since
having the owls I have not seen a mouse, which happy state of affairs, I
hope will continue ”.

* # *

An important breeding result in the Los Angeles Zoo. A pair of
Crimson-rumped Toucanets Aulacorhynchus haematopygius took over a
cavity excavated in a palm trunk by a pair of Lineated Barbets; three
eggs were laid and duly hatched. Upon leaving the nest the three chicks,
resembling miniature adults but considerably darker with the rump chest¬
nut rather than crimson, were removed from the flight cage to ensure their
survival.

The Committee of the Avicultural Society of South Australia has
compiled a Bird Price List. The prices quoted are to be regarded as a
guide only and refer to true, adult pairs, aviary-bred and of good quality.
Amongst the parrots listed are Crimson- winged at (roughly) .£8 15s. od.
Rock Pebblers, £ 6 os. od ., and Kings, £8 os. od. Export and import
prohibitions taken into consideration, the £500 recently asked in England
for a pair of the last named would seem to offer a great temptation for the
breaking of such.

NEWS AND VIEWS

251

David Spilsbury says of the 1970 Census for Rothschild’s Mynah:
“All owners known to keep this species have been sent a census form and
it is hoped that these will be returned promptly. The recent influx of
wild-caught specimens through the trade will have resulted in some new
owners and I would be glad if these aviculturists would contact me at
Withersfield, 5 Lambourne Avenue, Malvern Link, Worcs.

The census form this year seeks information on the feeding of breeding
and non-breeding stock, the sexing for the species and causes of death.
Also we seek to find out how many have been exported from Bali and,
of course, maintain our interest in the breeding of this fine mynah ”.

Mr. and Mrs. K. M. Scamell have just moved to Cornwall. During the
years they lived in Surrey, Mrs. Scamell notched up a long list of first
successes — Blue-Headed Rock Thrush, Daurian Redstart, Rubythroat,
Himalayan Rubythroat, Pied Bush Chat, Malachite Sunbird, Shelley’s
Starling, White-capped Tanager, Black Bulbul, Violet-eared Humming¬
bird, Indian Black Redstart, Spotted-winged Stare, Indian Blue Chat,
amongst others. But Mrs. Scamell has just been deprived of what might
perhaps be described as the “ Crowning glory ”. A young Cock of the
Rock Rupicola peruviana died on the 23rd day after it was hatched. Mrs.
Scamell writes: “ It was a great disappointment. I thought it was doing
quite well. The hen seemed to want to nest again. She was sitting on
the nest just after she had thrown out the chick ”.

* * *

Gerald Durrell, Hon. Director, Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust:
“ This year we have bred 11 more White Eared Pheasants (which are still
too young to sex) from the original pair: and the six pairs from last year
continue to flourish. They laid a number of eggs this year but, naturally,
all of them were infertile, but we hope next year to have a sort of Ford
production belt in operation.

We were nearly successful in breeding the Thick-billed Parrots I
brought back from the Mexican expedition two years ago. Unfortunately,
one young one was crushed by its parents at the age of ten days, and the
other one died shortly afterwards. We have not yet received a post¬
mortem report on it, but since our three pairs of birds are rather young
specimens, it was rather surprising that they bred at all.”

A. A. P.

252

NOTES

I

NOTES

“WHITE-CAPPED” AMERICAN PARROTS

When editing an article in the July- August number of the Magazine by
Miss Rosemary Low I found that the name “ Massena’s Parrot ” was not
used in books on South American birds, and therefore inserted the addi¬
tional name “ White-capped Parrot ”, which is the name given to Pionus
seneloides by de Schauensee in his several recent books on the birds of the
South American region, and is the name by which it is now likely to be
recognised. Miss Low has since pointed out that the name “ White-
capped Parrot ” is also used for P. senilis , and is more appropriate for the
latter species since it does have a white crown and forehead. This does
not, however, alter the fact that P. seneloides has also been given this name
and has appeared, and is likely to appear, as the White-capped Parrot in
books and articles on South American birds. Once such names are used
in standard regional avifaunas it is extremely difficult to change them;
and we can probably only remain aware that in present day writings on
birds we may encounter both a Central American White-capped Parrot,
P. senilis , and a South American White-capped Parrot, P. seniloides.

C. J. O. Harrison.

# # #

The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles,
notes, or correspondence.

INDEX

Alaska, Expedition in search of Grouse
and Ptarmigan, 195.

Alectura lathami , Bred in N. America,

161.

Amazon, Double Yellow-headed, Prob¬
able first breeding, 234.
„ „ „ ,, „ Aviary, 234.

„ „ „ „ „ Feeding, 235.

„ „ „ „ „ Incubation, 235.

„ „ „ „ ,, Young, 235.

Amazona ochrocephala oratrix, Probable
first breeding, 234.

Amazons. See also under Parrots.
Anderson, R., Bitten by snake, 249.
Audubon’s “ The Birds of America ”,
Record auction price, 37.
Aulacorhynchus haematopygius , Bred,
250.

Australian zoos. Bird in the South¬
eastern, 27.

,, „ „ Adelaide, 28.

„ „ ,, Melbourne, 31.

,, ,, ,, Sir Colin Mackenzie Sanc¬

tuary, 30.

„ „ „ Taronga Park, 32.

Aviaries, Instant planting of, 1 10.

„ Nylon netting useful for covering,
58.

Avicultural Society: —

Certificate of Merit awards, 13 1, 247.
Council Meeting, 13 1, 247.

,, Members, Election, 247.

Life Members, Hon., Elected, 247.
Medal awards, 13 1.

Receipts and Payments Account, 88.
Avicultural Society of America, New
President, 132.

Avicultural Society of South Australia,
Medal award, 35.

Aviculturists and the definition of Avi¬
culture, 77, 17 1.

Babbler, Grey-headed, Identification of,
I94*

„ Kansu, Identification of, 194.
Barbet, Brown-throated, Probable first
breeding, 145.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 145.

,, „ „ ,, Incubation, 145.

„ „ „ „ Nest, 145.

,, ,, ,, Certificate of Merit award

for breeding, 247.

Barclay- Smith, Miss P., Appointed
Vice-President, 13 1.

,, ,, „ ,, Awarded medals, 249.

Bates, H. W., Mobbed by toucans, 37.

Bee-eater, Carmine, Breeding the, 186.
,, ,, ,, ,, Artificial nest, 186,

187.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 186.

,, „ „ x European, 186.

,, ,, European, Breeding the, 186.

,, „ Little, General note, 137.

,, ,, ,, Probable first breeding,.

139.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 140.

„ „ „ „ Nest, 139, 140.

„ „ ,, Certificate of Merit award

for breeding, 247.

Berlin Zoo, News, 204.

Bertram, B. (Sub-Dept. of Animat
Behaviour, Cambridge), Awarded
Certificate of Merit, 13 1.

Bird of Paradise, Blue, Hand-rearing of,

67.

,, ,, „ Lawes’ six-plumed, Hand¬

rearing of, 67.

Birds boarding ship at sea off the Gulf
States of America, 149.

,, Enjoy smoke, 165.

,, Escapes, Information needed by
Rarities Committee, 150.

„ Tool-using by, 17 1.

Bishop, Fire-fronted, Breeding the, 94.
Blackbird, Italian ensnaring device, 164.
Bombycilla garrulus, Notes on breeding,
12.

Book reviews. See Reviews.

Brazilian bird collections, 71.

Breeding, Probable first success: —
Amazon, Double Yellow-headed, 234.
Barbet, Brown-throated, 145.
Bee-eater, Little, 139.

Chough, Alpine, 230.

Cockatoo, Lesser Sulphur-crested,
238.

Conure, Black-tailed, 141.

Hoopoe, Thailand, 189.

Lorikeet, Ornate, 241.

Magpie, Azure-winged, 240.

Motmot, Blue-crowned, 188.

Pie, Southern Tree, 144.

Pigeon, Yellow-breated Fruit, 146.
Starling, Black-necked, 6.

Tanager, Lemon-rumped, 216.
Touraco, Grey, 232.

Breeding results: —

Adelaide Zoo, 36.

Australia, Western, 36.

Bray, G. and B., 165.

Chester Zoo, 134, 249.

Chicago Zoological Park, 135.

Cleres, 24.

254

INDEX

Breeding results — contd.

Daw’s Hall Wildfowl Farm, 35.
Falconry Centre, 164.

Hodges, J. R., 76, 248.

Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust,

251.

Kelling Park Aviaries, 76, 249.
Kendall, S. B., 206.

King, H., 36.

Kyme, R. T., 76, 133.

Miscellaneous, 76.

Norfolk Wildlife Park, 129, 244.
Norgaard-Olesen, E., 35, 206, 250.
Norris, K. A., 245.

Paris, Peter, 168.

Roer, Bernard, 206.

Scamell, K. M., 166, 207, 251.
Schneider, Paul, 134.

Smith, Clifford, 76, 250.

Smith, G. A., 167, 208.

Spilsbury, D., 248.

Swaenepoel, L. A., 133, 164, 206.
Trollope, J., 250.

Tropical Bird Gardens, Rode, 134.
British Aviculturists’ Club, 132, 163,
248.

Broadbill, Green, Behaviour of, 16.
Budgerigars, French moult in, 38.
Bunting, Elegant, Description, 41.

„ „ Food, 45.

„ „ Habitat and habits, 44.

„ „ Nesting, 46.

,, ,, Races and distribution, 44.

,, Lark-like, Breeding the, 4.

„ „ „ „ Description, 4.

„ „ „ „ Eggs, 5.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 5.

,, ,, ,, ,, Incubation, 5.

Cacatua ( Licmetis ) tenuirostris , Breeding
of, 236.

,, s. sulphur ea, Probable first breed¬
ing, 238.

Calyptomena viridis, Behaviour of, 16.
Cardinal, Pygmy, Breeding the, 174.

„ „ „ Diet, 175.

,, ,, ,, Nesting behaviour, 174.

„ „ „ „ site, 174.

,, ,, ,, Nestlings, 174.

,, ,, Reared, 166.

Catbird, Green, Medal award for
breeding, 35.

Chalcophaps indica, Note on, 213.

Chat, Indian Blue, Medal award for
breeding, 131.

Chough, Alpine, Probable first breed¬
ing, 230.

„ „ „ Feeding, 231.

„ „ „ Nest, 230.

„ „ „ Young, 231.

Choughs. Bred at Riber Castle Fauna
Reserve, 165.

Cleres, Bird at, 24.

Cock of the Rock, Feeding with tomato
retains colour, 207.

Cockatiels, Versatile foster parents, 212.
Cockatoo, Lesser Sulphur-crested,
Probable first
breeding, 238.

„ „ „ „ >, Aviary, 238.

„ „ „ „ „ Food, 239.

» » „ „ „ Young, 239-

,, Long-billed. See Slender-billed.
,, Slender-billed, Breeding of, 236.

,, ,, „ „ Aviary, 236.

„ „ „ „ Chicks, 237.

„ „ „ „ Food, 237.

,, „ „ Previously bred, 77.

Conure, Black-tailed, Probable first
breeding, 132, 141.
„ „ „ „ Aviary, 141.

„ ,, ,, ,, Feeding, 141.

„ „ „ „ Young, 141, 142.

,, ,, ,, Medal award for breeding,

247.

,, Jendaya, Breeding in New Jersey,

165.

,, Jendaya x Golden-headed, 135.

,, Red-masked, Bred, 249.

,, „ „ Generic name of, 207.

,, ,, ,, Reared at Chester Zoo,

J34-

Corella. See Cockatoo, Slender-billed.
Corythaixoides c. concolor, Probable first
breeding, 232.

Coturnix japonica, Breeding and be¬
haviour, 177.

Courser, Cream-coloured, Rare vagrant
in Great Britain, 35.

Crane, Whooping, Aransas National
Wildlife Refuge, 133.

Creatophora cinerea, Bred, 249.

Curlew, Stone, Breeding the, 76.
Cyanopica , cyanus cooki, Probable first
breeding, 240.

Delacour, J., Medal established in
honour, 133.

,, ,, ,, „ First award to Prof. K.

Lorenz, 133.

,, ,, 80th birthday, 248.

Dendrocitta leucogaster, Probable first
breeding, 144.

Dove, Bronze-winged, Notes on, 213.

„ „ „ „ Aviary, 215.

,, „ „ „ Feeding, 215.

„ ,, „ ,, Habitat, 215.

,, Emerald. See Bronze-winged.

,, Key- west Quail, Keeping and
breeding, 66.

„ „ „ „ „ Dilute form, 66.

Eagle, Golden, Young bred in Lake
District, 206.

INDEX

255

Eagle, Monkey-eating, Numbers de¬
clining, 165.

,, White-tailed, Disappear from Fair
Isle, 133.

Emberiza elegans, Rare in this country,
41-

Erithacus rubecula , Breeding of, 158.
Eudyptula minor, General note on, 21.
Euplectes diademata, Breeding of, 94.

Film: —

“ The incredible Hummingbirds ”,
!32.

Finch, African Green Singing, Bred in
Australia, 147.

„ ,, „ », „ Aviary, 147.

„ Black-crested. See Cardinal,
Pygmy.

,, Green Singing x Yellow-rumped
Grey Singing, 165.

Flamingos, Keeping and breeding at
Slimbridge Wildfowl Trust, 18.
French moult, Possible connection with
Vitamin D, 39.

Fringillaria impetuani , Breeding of, 4.

Gallinules, Purple, Behaviour of cap¬
tive, 98.

,, ,, ,, Breeding, 106.

,, ,, „ Calls, 102.

,, ,, ,, Courtship and sexual be¬

haviour, 104.

„ „ „ Feeding, 100.

,, ,, ,, Maintenance behaviour,

98.

,, ,, ,, Tail -flicking, 101.

„ ,, ,, Threat and agressive be¬

haviour, 102.

„ ,, Young help at nest, 2.

Garrulax caerulatus, Breeding of, 143.

,, cineraceus, Identification of, 194.

„ sukatschewi, Identification of, 194.
Geotrygon chrysia, Keeping and breed¬
ing, 66.

Ghigi, Prof. A., Clebrates 95th birth¬
day, 76.

Hall, A. E., Awarded medal, 13 1.
Hemiphode, Andalusian, Behaviour of,
219.

,, ,, ,, Dust and sun-bathing,

225.

„ „ „ Voice, 223.

„ Barred, Behaviour of, 219.

,, „ „ Body sway, 225.

,, ,, ,, Dust and sun-bathing,

225.

„ „ „ Egg-rolling, 225.

„ „ ,, Hen display, 225.

„ „ „ Nesting, 224.

„ ,, ,, Voice, 223.

Hirundo rustica, Hand-rearing of, 148.
Hoopoe, Thailand, Probable first breed¬
ing, 189.

„ „ „ Feeding, 190.

„ „ „ Young, 189, 190.

Hornbill, Great Indian, Damaged beak
repaired, 206.

Hybrids:—

Bee-eater, Carmine x European, 186.
Conure, Jendaya x Golden-headed,
135-

Finch, Green Singing x Yellow-
rumped Grey Singing, 165.

Ibis, Black-headed x Straw-necked,
204.

Macaw, Blue and Yellow x Scarlet,

36.

,, Red and Yellow x Blue and
Yellow, 135.

Parrakeet, Barnard’ s-Pennant’s x Port
Lincoln, 134.

Ibis, Black-headed x Straw-necked, 204.
„ Scarlet, Certificate of Merit award
for breeding, 13 1.

Ispidina picta, Keeping of, 89.

King, David, President Avicultural
Society of America, 132.
Kingfisher, Natal Pygmy, Keeping the,
89.

„ „ „ „ Cage, 90.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 90.

Lanins schach, Care and breeding of, 61.
Leucopsar rothschildi, The 1969 census,
ii5-

London Zoo, Notes, 205.

Lophospingus pusillus, Breeding of, 174.
Lorenz, K., Awarded medal, 133.
Lorikeet, Louisiade, Bred at Chester
Zoo, 206.

,, Mitchell’s, Breeding the, 26.

„ „ „ Aviary, 26.

„ „ „ Young, 27.

„ „ Bred, 76.

,, Ornate, Breeding the, 164.

,, ,, Probable first breeding, 241.

„ „ „ Aviary, 241.

„ „ „ Food, 242.

„ „ „ Young, 241, 242.

Lorikeets, Subspecies difficult to iden¬
tify, 192.

Macaw, Blue and Yellow x Scarlet, 36.
,, Hyacinthine, Near success in
breeding, 135.

„ Red and Yellow x Blue and Yel¬
low, 135.

256 INDEX

Magpie, Azure-winged, Probable first
breeding, 240.

„ „ „ „ Food, 240.

,, Red-billed Blue, Adventure of an
escaped, 38.

Meat and protein food for parrots, 84.
Merops apiaster, Breeding of, 186.

„ nubicus, Breeding of, 186.

,, pusillus, Probable first breeding,
139-

„ „ Note on, 137.

Momotus momota, Probable first breed¬
ing, 188.

Moorhen, Behaviour of, 208.

Motmot, Blue-crowned, Probable first
breeding, 188.

,, ,, ,, ,, Chicks, 188.

„ „ „ „ Feeding, 188.

Mynah, Common, Bred, 77.

,, Rothschild’s, The 1969 census,
1 15>

„ ,, Return of census forms re¬

quested, 251.

,, South Indian (Lesser) Hill, Cer¬
tificate of Merit award for
breeding, 13 1.

Native Hens, Tasmanian, Interactions
with wild moorhens, 56.

Neophema chrysostoma, Care and breed¬
ing of, 47.

Norfolk Wildlife Park, Breeding results,
129, 244.

Norris, K. A., Breeding results, 245.
Nuthatch, Notes on breeding, 10.

Nylon netting, Used as cover in aviaries,
58.

Obituary : —

Bird, Walter, 13 1.

Boehm, Edward M., 131.

Crandall, Lee S., 13 1.

Erlanger, Mrs. Alene S., 13 1.
Louwman, Pieter W., 13 1.

Palmella, Duke of, 13 1.

Partridge, W. R., 131.

Reay, J. H., 13 1.

Silver, Allan, 34.

Turner, Walter H., 13 1.
Odontophorus capueira, Bred in North
America, 1.

Osprey, At Loch Garten, 206.

„ Breeding in Scotland, 133.

Owl, Barn, Bred, 250.

,, Snowy, At Fetlar Reserve, 133,
206.

„ „ Breeding by a one-year-old,

75.

Paradisaea rudolphi, Hand-rearing of,

67.

Parotia lawesi, Hand-rearing of, 67.
Parrakeet, Barnard’s-Pennant’s x Port
Lincoln, 134.

,, Blue-winged Grass, Care and
breeding, 47.

„ „ „ „ „ Aviaries, 49.

,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Breeding results,

48.

„ ,, ,, ,, ,, Description, 48.

„ ,, „ „ „ Eggs, 50.

„ „ „ „ „ Food, 49.

„ „ „ „ „ Nest, 49.

,, Cloncurry, Bred, 36.

,, Indian Ring-necked, Rearing the,
92.

,, ,, ,, „ „ Mutation, 94, 212.

,, Long-tailed, Notes on, 179.

,, ,, ,, Breeding behaviour, 182.

,, ,, ,, Food, 180, 181.

,, Quaker, Bred, 35.

,, Red-rumped, Seen in Adelaide,
209.

Parrakeets, Bred, 248.

„ and Seedeaters, Notes on, 168.
Parrot, Indian Ring-necked. Colour¬
ing of albino, 212.

,, Massena’s, Little known to avi-
culturists, 153.

„ „ „ Description, 153.

„ „ „ Food, 154.

„ ,, ,, Ideal pet, 154.

„ Pesquet’s, Acquired, 78.

„ „ Care of, 133.

,, ,, Query on vernacular name,

164.

„ Red-capped, Care and feeding.
96.

,, Senegal, Behaviour of a pair, 78,
,, White-capped, Vernacular name
for two species, 252.

,, Yellow'-headed. See Amazon,
Double Yellow-headed.

Parrots, Amazona, In Dominica, 76.

,, ,, Rare and vanishing, 169.

,, Australian, Studies on, 155.

,, ,, ,, Number of species, 155.

,, ,, Prices in Australia, 250.

,, Extinct, vanishing and hypotheti¬
cal, 198.

,, Longevity: Blue- or Turquoise-
fronted Amazon, 40.

,, African Grey, 40.

,, Meat and protein food, 84, 85, 86,
170.

,, Subspecies difficult to identify,
191-

Partridge, Capueiria. See Quail, Spot¬
winged Wood.

Partridge, P. B.,|Awarded medal, 132.
Passer lutea. Bred in Australia, 147.
Payne, Claude M., Appointed Q.B.E.,
76.

INDEX

257

Penguins, Australian, General note on
behaviour and habits in natural
habitat, 21.

,, Gentoo, At Edinburgh Zoo, 166.
Pheasant, Golden, Hen plumage identi¬
cal to cock, 35.

Phylloscopus trochilus, Notes on breed¬
ing, 11.

Pie, Southern Tree, Probable first
breeding, 144.

„ „ „ Aviary, 144.

„ „ „ Eggs, 144.

„ „ „ ,, Incubation, 144.

„ „ „ Young, 144.

„ „ Certificate of Merit award

for breeding, 247.

Pigeon, Yellow-breasted Fruit, Prob¬
able first breed¬
ing, 146.

» „ „ » » Eggs, 146.

„ „ „ „ „ „ Incubation,

146.

„ „ „ „ „ Feeding, 146.

„ „ „ „ „ Nest, 146.

,, ,, „ ,, Certificate of Merit

award for breeding,
247.

Pionopsitta pileata, Care and feeding of,
96-

Pionus seniloides , General note, 153.
Pithecophaga jefferi , Total population,

i65-

Porphyrio porphyria, Behaviour of
captive, 98.

„ „ Young help at nest, 2.

Protein foods for parrots, 84.

Pryor, G. R., Awarded medal, 13 1.
Psittacula krameri manillensis, Hand¬
rearing of, 92.

,, longicaudata , Notes on, 179.
Ptilinopus occipitalis , Probable first
breeding, 146.

Pyrrhocorax g. graculus, Probable first
breeding, 230.

Pyrrhura melanura , Probable first breed¬
ing, 141.

Quail, Japanese, Breeding and be¬
haviour, 177.

„ „ „ Aviary, 177.

„ „ „ Eggs, 177.

,, „ „ ,, Incubated by Barbary

Doves, 177.

„ „ „ Food, 177, 178.

,, Spot-winged Wood, First breed¬
ing in North
America, 1.

„ „ „ „ „ Eggs, 1.

,, ,, ,, „ „ Incubation, 1.

„ „ „ „ „ Nest, 1.

Quelea, Origin of name, 164.

Rail, Blackish, Medal award for breed¬
ing, 131-

Ramphocelus icteronotus , Probable first
breeding of, 216.

Rarities Committee, Need information
on escaping birds, 150.

Redrumps, Bred, 35.

Reviews : —

Birds of Paradise and Bower Birds
(E. Thomas Gilliard), 79.
Australian Parrots (Joseph M. For-
shaw), 80.

Fremdlandisch Stubenvogel [Foreign cage
aviary birds ] (H. Dost), 82.
Papageien in Haus und Garten
[Parrots in house and garden ]
(W. de Grahl), 83.

Patterns of reproductive behaviour
(Desmond Morris), 136.

A guide to Pheasants of the World
(Philip Wayne), 167.

Birds of the Lebanon and the Jordan
area (S. Vere Benson), 210.
Krankheiten der Vogel [Diseases of
birds ] (H-S. Raethel), 21 1.

Birds of the Pacific North-west [with
special reference to Oregon ] (J. N.
Gabrielson and S. G. Jewett), 21 1.

Rhodes, Brenda, Awarded medal, 247.

Robin, Breeding the, 158.

„ „ Aviary, 158.

„ , „ Food, 158, 159.

Rowlands, Russ, Awarded medal, 35.

Saxicola torquata, Breeding of, 227.
Scamell, K. M., Awarded medals, 13 1.

„ „ First successes, 250.

Schneider, Paul, Breeding results in
California, 134.

Scott, Peter, Awarded medal, 248.

Seitz, Alfred, Retires, 76.

Serinus mozambicus , Bred in Australia,
147-

Shrike, Black-headed Bush, General
note, 173.

,, Rufous-backed, Breeding and
care, 58.

Silver, Allen, Obituary, 34.

Sitta europaea, Notes on breeding, 10.
Smith, G. A., Breeding results, 208.
Sparrow, African Song, Bred in Austra¬
lia, 147.

„ „ „ „ Nest, 147.

Stare, Spotted-winged, Medal award
for breeding, 1 3 1 .

Starling, African Wattled, Probable
first breeding in Zool. Garten,
Frankfurt am M., 249.

,, Black-necked, Probable first
breeding, 6.

„ „ „ „ Aviary, 6.

INDEX

258

Starling Black-necked, Chicks, 7.

„ „ „ ,, „ Treatment, 7.

„ „ „ „ Eggs, 7, 8,

» „ » >, Food, 7.

„ „ „ „ Nest, 6, 8.

„ ,, „ Medal award for breeding,

131-

Stonechat, Breeding the, 227.

„ „ Chicks, 229, 230.

„ „ Feeding, 227, 228, 230.

,, ,, Nest, 228, 229.

Sturnus nigricollis, Probable first breed¬
ing of, 6.

Subspecies of parrots and lorikeets hard
to identify, 191.

Swaenepoel, Madame Georgette,
Awarded medal, 133.

Swallows, Hand-rearing and care of
baby, 148.

Sylvia communis , Notes on breeding, 9.

Talegallus, Yellow-wattled. See Tur¬
key, Yellow-wattled Brush.

Tanager, Fawn-naped, Breeding the,
243.

„ „ „ „ Food, 243.

,, Lemon-rumped, Probable first
breeding, 216.

,, „ „ ,, Aviary, 216, 217.

„ „ „ „ Chicks, 217.

„ „ „ „ Eggs, 216, 217.

„ „ „ „ Food, 218.

„ ,, ,, ,, Nest, 216, 217.

Tangara ruficervix leucotis, Breeding of,
243-

Tchagra senegala, Note on, 173.

Thrush, Grey-backed, New stock
wanted, 35.

,, Rufous Laughing-, Breeding the,
143-

„ „ „ „ Eggs, 143.

„ >, „ Food, 143.

„ „ „ „ Gapes, 143.

„ „ „ „ Nest, 143.

Thrushes, Italian ensaring device, 164.
Toucanets, Crimson-rumped, Bred in
Los Angeles Zoo, 250.

Touraco, Grey, Probable first breeding,
232.

„ „ „ Chicks, 233

„ „ „ Nest, 232.

Tracy Aviary, Salt Lake City, New bird
house, 249.

Trichoglossus haematod aberrans, Bred
206.

,, ,, mitchelli, Breeding of, 26.

,, ornatus, Probable first breeding,

241*

Tricholaema melanocephalum stigmata-
thorax, Probable first breeding, 145.
Tropical Bird Gardens, Rode, Awarded
Certificate of Merit,
1 3 I ;

,, „ ,, ,, Breeding results, 134.

Turkey, Yellow-wattled Brush, Bred in
N. America, 16 1.

„ „ ,, „ ,, Chicks, 162, 163.

„ „ „ „ „ Eggs, 162.

„ „ „ „ „ Food, 161, 163.

,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Mound, 161.

Turnix suscitator, Behaviour of, 219.

,, sylvatica, Behaviour of, 219.

Upupa epops longirostris, Probable first
breeding, 189.

Uru. See Quail, Spot-winged Wood.

Vitamins, Connection with French
Moult, 38.

Warbler, Willow, Notes on breeding,
11.

Waterfowl, Details of all forms of water-
fowl eggs, 52.

Waxbill, Red-eared, At liberty in
Portugal, 39.

Waxwing, Notes on breeding, 12.

Wayre, Philip, Filming in India, 132.

White-Throat, Common, Notes on
breeding, 9.

“ Winged World ”, Awarded Certifi¬
cates of Merit, 247.

,, ,, News from, 1 14.

The Pheasant Trust

and

Norfolk Wildlife Park

TIMES OF OPENING

OPEN EVERY DAY: 10.30 a.m. — 6.30 p.m., or sunset if earlier

PRICES OF ADMISSION

Members of Ornamental Pheasant Trust — Free of Charge
Members of the Avicuitura! Society will be particularly welcome
Adults: 5s. (non-members) Children: 3/-

Coach parties of 25 and over: adults 3/-, children 2/-

Organised school parties: 2/- each

Refreshments are available at the licensed Restaurant
A free Car Park is adjacent to the Gate House
Nos. 29 and 402 Eastern Counties Omnibus stop near the entrance

NO DOGS ALLOWED

The Ornamental Pheasant Trust and Norfolk Wildlife Park are on the main
A1067— 14 miles from Norwich.

THE

Tropical Bird
Gardens, Rode

(between Bath and Frome)

Turn off the A36 at The Red Lion, Woolverton

Hundreds of brilliant exotic birds in lovely natural
surroundings: 17 acres of woodland, flower gardens
and ornamental lake

OPEN DAILY
including
Sundays ALL
THE YEAR

Children must be
accompanied by
Adults

CAR PARK

CAFETERIA

EMo dogs admitted

RODE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS LTD.

Telephone: BECKINGTON 326

MEALWORMS

(English bred)

Provide a useful addition to the dietary needs of most
insectivorous birds, as well as being a tasty titbit well
liked byjthe majority of these birds.

1 oz. 3/9; 2 oz. 6/6; 4 oz. 12/-; 8 oz. 20/-; 1 lb. 32/6;

2 lbs. 58/-; 4 lbs. 105/-; 6 lbs. 145/-

^// these prices are carriage paid.

E. W. Coombs Limited, (Dept. A.M.)

Frindsbury Road, Strood, Kent.

Phone: Medway 79886/7 Grams: Avicult-Rochester

ENGLISH NAMES
OF THE PARROTS

A list of 2,000 English names used by
ornithologists during this century

Price Is. 6d. post free

Arthur A. Prestwich

EDENBRIDGE, KENT

Y

BOOKS on BIRDS

Catalogue

on

request

WHELDON & WESLEY LTD.

LYTTON LODGE, CODICOTE
Nr. HITCHIN, HERTS.

Telephone: Codicote 370

VISIT

STAGSDEN BIRD GARDENS

One of the largest private collections of rare Pheasants in
the British Isles, also Peafowl, Waterfowl, Black-necked
Swans, Macaws, Parrakeets and Flamingos, together
numbering over 1,300 birds

Open every day (including Sundays)
from 10 a.m.

Admission 4/- Children 2/-

Stagsden is 5 miles west of Bedford on the A422.

The Gardens are 150 yards north of Stagsden Church.

F. E. B. JOHNSON
Stagsden Bird Gardens

Stagsden, Bedford Tel.: Oakley 2745

When Visiting the

COTSWOLDS

AVI CULT URISTS
ARE WELCOME TO

Set in the charm of
an old English Garden
at the lovely Village of

BOUR TON- ON- THE- WA TER

The Avicultural Society of America

Founded 1927

Hon. President: Dr. Jean Delacour.

President: Mr. David King
Secretary: Richard C. Frantzen,

13914 Don Julian Road, La Puente, California 91746, U.S.A.

The Society year begins January 1st, but new members may join
at any time and are entitled to the back issues of the AVICULTURAL
BULLETIN, Roster for the current year and a copy of the By Laws.
One membership includes husband and wife. The annual dues
for domestic (Canada & Mexico included) membership are $4.00,
Foreign dues are $5.00. Please send remittance to the Membership
Secretary, Mrs. Marian Wagner, 565 East Channel Rd., Santa
Monica, California 90402. Make your check payable to
Avicultural Society of America. Foreign applicants please remit
dues by International Bank Draft or Money Order only.

The Avicultural Society of South Australia

Founded 1928

The oldest Avicultural Society in Australia invites all interested in
aviculture to become members. Subscription is £ 1 5s. 0 d. sterling
per annum, and this includes a monthly magazine Bird Keeping
in Australia mailed to all members. This is entirely original and deals
with the keeping and breeding of many Australian and exotic
species of birds.

Please forward membership application and subscription to the
Secretary, Eric Baxter, 17 Benjamin Street, Manningham,

South Australia, 5086.

The Avicultural Society of Australia

Catering for the English-speaking breeders of Australian birds
throughout the world. Monthly magazine Australian Aviculture
posted free to all members.

Overseas subscriptions : United States of America, $4.00;
all other countries, Aust. $3.00.

Secretary, Frank A. Ripper 10 Tyne Street, Burwood,

Victoria, 31 25, Australia.

ENCYCLOPAEDIA
OF AVICULTURE

Volume i

Edited by A. Rutgers & K. A. Norris

77 SPECIES IN FULL COLOUR. 209 IN BLACK AND WHITE

330 LINE DRAWINGS. 350 pp. TEXT AND ILLUSTRATIONS. SIZE 1 1$ x 8"

This Encylopaedia provides a major work of reference which incorporates articles by
leading aviculturists of the world. It is based on the original Dutch publication Encyclopedia
voor de Vogelliefhehber, compiled by A. Rutgers, an experienced aviculturist, judge and
exhibitor of exotic birds. He considers that the successful maintenance of a
collection of birds in captivity depends very largely on a thorough knowledge of
their natural habitat and of their feeding and breeding habits in the wild. Leading
ornithologists and aviculturists from all parts of the world were invited to write on the
groups of birds on which they are the recognized authorities. His distinguished team of
writers includes Jean Delacour, Carl Naether, Robert L. Busenbark, Henry J. Bates
from U.S.A., Dr. E. Nieboer, Netherlands, Joseph Forshaw, Australia, and many
others.

Mr. K. A. Norris, Chairman of the British Aviculturists* Club and past President of the
Foreign Bird League of Great Britain, was one of the over-all editors of the original Dutch
publication. The appearance in three volumes of the English edition is the result of extensive
research and revision on his part, and he has contributed additional descriptions and details.
Mr. Norris, who has made a life-long study of exotic birds, has an extensive range of aviaries
and is the editor of two previous books, The Handbook of Foreign Birds in Colour I and II.

With certain exceptions, the classification followed throughout the work is that adopted
by Peters in his Check List of Birds of the World, and for orders and families not covered
by the volumes of the Check List so far published, A Classification of Recent Birds by Mayr
and Amadon has been used.

This first volume contains introductory articles including one specially commissioned by
Christine Startup, M.R.C.V.S., on Diseases. It covers 17 Orders from Struthioniformes to
Columbiformes. Over 70 species are illustrated in colour, and there are 209 black and
white photographs, with 330 line drawings.

Volume II, to be published in 1971, largely consists of the Psitticiformes (Parrot Family);
and Volume III, in preparation, contains the Passeriformes (small seed-eating birds) and
several other Orders.

Published by BLANDFORD PRESS LTD., Volume I, available now, costs £8 (plus 4s. 6 d.
postage in U.K.; overseas postage and registration 8s. Od.)

FREE GIFT OFFER (valid to 31 December 1970 only). Customers using the order form
below may receive entirely free of charge, one of the undermentioned books (please indicate
preference ).

•AN INTRODUCTION TO BIRD KEEPING (D. H. S. Risdon). Published at 15s.

FUNCTIONAL ANATOMY OF BIRDS (A. N. Worden) „ ., 9s. 6d.

YOUR TALKING BUDGERIGAR (F. W. Pratley) „ „ 8s. 6 d.

•Note : We have only 100 copies of this book available, and it must be “ first come, first

served ”.

ORDER FORM

To SOUTHERN BOOKSELLERS & PUBLISHING CO. (Dept. A.M.)

35 WOODLAND VALE ROAD, ST. LEONARDS-ON-SEA, SUSSEX.

Please supply......... ..................copy/copies ENCLOPAEDIA OF AVICULTURE, Vol.l,

for which l/we enclose £ : : (including postage), and

advise me when later volumes available.

My Free Gift preference is (title) . . . . . . .

(Second choice) . . .

NAME . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ADDRESS . . . . . . . . . .

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

{Established 1956)

Invites your membership. Subscription $2.00 Aust. Due on the
1 st January each year. Magazine dealing with all aspects of
aviculture posted each month. Back issues supplied where
available.

Send application to:

The Secretary: W. L. Burns, P.O. Box 55, Morley, 6062,
Western Australia.

THE BRITISH BIRD BREEDERS ASSOCIATION

was founded in 1934 by Hylton Blythe and without his foresight we
should not enjoy keeping, breeding, and exhibiting our native species
as we do today.

If you are interested in the study and breeding of native and
European species we invite you to join. Details of membership may
be obtained from the:

Hon Secretary, Peter Howe,

3 Station Road, Lower Stondon,
Henlow, Beds,

Telephone: Henlow Camp 342

MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS

The charge for Members' advertisements is sixpence per word. Payment must
accompany the advertisement, which must be sent to A. A. Prestwich, Galley’s
Wood, Edenbridge, Kent. All members of the Society are entitled to use this
column , but the Council reserves the right to refuse any advertisements they consider
unsuitable.

Wanted. — Aviculture , Vol. Ill (1931): — Professor Carl Naether, 16759 Otsego
Street, Encino, California 91316, U.S.A,

Wanted. — Pure-bred Amherst Pheasants. 1970. 1-1 or 2—0. Offers to Hon.

Secretary, Galley’s Wood, Edenbridge, Kent.

The Avicultural Magazine is distributed by Taylor & Francis Ltd., 10-41
Macklin Street, London, WC2B 5NF, to whom members should address all
orders for extra copies and back numbers. Subscriptions and back number orders
from non-members should also be sent to Taylor & Francis Ltd. The subscription
rate, payable in advance, is £2 10s. (U.S.A., $6.15) per year, and the price for
individual numbers is 10s. od. per copy.

The Avicultural Magazine is printed by Warren & Son Ltd., The Wykeham
Press, 85 High Street, Winchester, Hants (an associate company of Taylor &
Francis Ltd.), from whom cases for binding the Magazine (in art cloth, with gold
block on side) can be obtained. Alternatively the printers can undertake the
binding of complete current volumes (for which they have binding cases in stock).
They can also undertake the binding of complete volumes of back numbers (for
which binding cases have to be specially made), Members are requested to state
whether they desire the covers and advertisements to be bound with the volume.
Prices on application.

NEW MEMBERS

The twenty-one Candidates for Membership in the September-October, 1970,
number of the Avicultural Magazine were duly elected members of the Society.

CORRECTED NAME
For P. Haines, read R. Haines.

AMENDED ADDRESS

Miss M. R. Clayden, Anatomy Dept., Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Canada.

CHANGES OF ADDRESS

Raymond J. Chesnik, to 418 Buena Creek Road, San Marcos, California 92069,
U.S.A.

Keith Holdsworth, to The Sundowner, Arley Drive, Widnes, Lancs.

Frank Y. C. Hung, to 33 Malden Road, Liverpool L6 6BF.

Olle Janson, to 11 Grale Avenue, Cabramatta, N.S.W. 2166, Australia.

Cecil Eugene Knoder, to National Audubon Society, P.O. Box 231, Tavernier,
Florida 33070, U.S.A.

Peter Odekerken, to 177 South Rand Road, Hazeldene, Germiston, South Africa.
K. M. Scamell, to “Wayside”, Rosenithon Road, St. Keverne, Nr. Helston,
Cornwall.

Mrs. K. M. Scamell, to “Wayside”, Rosenithon Road, St. Keverne, Nr.
Helston, Cornwall.

Harold M. Shultz, to 5950 N. Camino Escalante, Tucson, Arizona 85718, U.S.A.
Richard B. Stewart, to R. F. D. 1, Goffstown, N.H. 03045, U.S.A.

Stephen R. Wylie, to 302 S. Hobart Drive, Laurel Springs, New Jersey 08021,
U.S.A.

CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP

Neville G. Atwell, “ Stoney Hill ”, Sandford, St. Philip, Barbados, West Indies.
Proposed by Miss K. Bonner.

Frederick G. Bradbury, “ Merrymead ”, 34 Linden Grove, Chandler’s Ford,
Eastleigh, Hants. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Donald Bruning, New York Zoological Park, Bronx, New York 10460, U.S.A.
Proposed by Joseph Bell.

A. K. Burchell, 67 Loddon Bridge Road, Woodley, Berks. Proposed by Prof¬
essor J. R. Hodges.

Kenneth Clare, Route Five, Galt, Ontario, Canada. Proposed by Miss K.
Bonner.

Peter S. Clipstone, Stoneridge, Wood Street, Geddington, Nr. Kettering,
Northants. Proposed by E. Wilford Smith.

Godwin Austin Craig, 28 Arthur Avenue, St. Thomas, Ontario, Canada.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Neol de Cramer, Ter Vennelaan 4, 9880 Aalter, Belgium. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

C. Robert Eddinger, Department of Zoology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu,
Hawaii 96822. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Lincoln A. Glasse, 42 View Parade, Saratogo, N.S.W., Australia 2051. Proposed
by A.A. Prestwich.

Mrs. Mary Haynes, Sladmore Gardens, Cryers Hill, High Wycombe, Bucks.
Proposed by H. Horswell.

Paul Jourde, Parc Zoologique de Branfere, 56 Le Guerno, Morbihan, France.
Proposed by Dr. Jean Delacour.

Gustav Kirk, D 3221 Hohenbuechen 31, West Germany. Proposed by A. A.
Prestwich.

P. Kooy, “ Waterfowl Farm ”, Rijksweg 129, ’t Zand (N-H), Holland. Proposed
by W. B. Frostick.

Lionel Gordon Korkie, 175 Eynham Road, Mondeor, Johannesburg, South
Africa. Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Ladislav Kucera, Susice, Palackeho 196/111, okres Klatovy, Czechoslovakia.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwich.

Madame R. Lacour-Gayet, 19 Avenue Franklin D. Roosevelt, 75 Paris VIII*,
France. Proposed by Dr. Jean Delacour.

R. M. Leigh, “Habitat”, Barrow Hill, Copythorne, Southampton S04 2PH.
Proposed by A. A. Prestwick.

Mrs. G. Laver, Sladmore Farm, Cryers Hill, High Wycombe, Bucks. Proposed by
H. Horswell.

Henry Nilsson, 115 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94111, U.S.A.
Proposed Ansel W. Robison.

Denis Gerald Osborne, 91 Bedgrove, Aylesbury, Bucks. Proposed by R.
Franklin.

J. R. Paiz, 580 E. Payson Street, San Dimas, California 91773, U.S.A. Proposed
by Herbert R. Anderson.

G. D. B. Rhys, “ Redlands ”, 22 Silverdale Road, Burgess Hill, Sussex. Proposed
by Miss K. Bonner.

P. C. A. van Dijk, “ Eurobird”, Pieter Breughelstraat 31, Oisterwijk, Holland.
Proposed by L. P. H. A. van Lent.

Colin M. Vince, 25 Winifred Avenue, Hornchurch, Essex. Proposed by Peter
G. Paris.

I. E. Whiston, “Rugosa”, 5 School Road, Gadbrook, Northwich, Cheshire.
Proposed by J. A. Green.

Dr. K. J. Whitelaw, Swan Farm, Ash, Sevenoaks, Kent. Proposed by J.
Midwinter.

DONATIONS
(Colour Plate Fund)

The Council wishes to thank the following Members for their donations to the
Colour Plate Fund.

A. Bourke J. Bramley

Will Members please donate their surplus books on birds to the Society
for the benefit of the Colour Plate Fund.

1 .:■)
>■ t
I-

!

n

Printed by Warren and Son Ltd., Winchester.

v\m^’ z « /■' t vMAkWj/ 2 ,

>' 5 >v 2

N1VIN0SH1II/MSC°S3 I 8V88 I l^L I B R AR I ES^SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION ^NCj
co ^ _ ^ 5 <o ~ cn

> *V . “ /SiSK&v w «

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlifUllSNI NVINOSHlIlNS S3 I avaa 11 U

z r- . , , x ^ ^ T

o ^<USV4?\ __ < • o /^vwvt\ OT

m ZL m

co zz m \ tz co

NVIN0SH1IIAIS S3I8V88I1 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NC
_ _ CO X CO 2 <o

c 5 ^ «■ — ~

> 2 A § NOUix^x ^ >

°SMITHSONIAN^ INSTITUTION NOlifUllSNI NVINOSHIIWS^SS I 8 V d 8 11 L I
n X ... co — co

o n^v _ x^nis^x o v _ x^y o

llVINOSHilWS^SS I ava a n‘Jll B RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION NC

■ \- Z r- Z Z

2 S&ijnfcs - ° O

CO

■n

SMITHSONIAN*" INSTITUTION^NOlifllllSNI ~ NVIN0SHJ.IWS S3iavaai1 LI

o z * CO X CO 2

X

_ w _ r Jr /■'" H~

2 ^ Z CO - 2 CO

NviNOSHims saiavaan libraries smithsonian institution nc

5 \ CO ^ _ ^ ~ CO X CO

D \y q

z -I 2 _

^smithsonian^institution NouniiiSNi nvinoshiiws S3 1 avaan^u

z ^ ^ ^ 5 |

~ NViNOSHiiiNs^sa i a va a n l i b r ar i es^smithsonian "institution0 m

V/-

3> X^yASj^X ^ 5» 2 X^yos^X >

Nl NVINOSHIIWS^SS I 9 V9 9 II LI B RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
co _ _ “ co . ~ a

h - /gHjKSv 3 /SSi&x - JP^ *

o z 5 5^'X 7 5

2 ~J 2 _J 2!

IS SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlifUUSNI NVINOSH1IINS S3 1 9V99I1

; 2: r- ^ z r~ z _ r

cr . y<^sc^>v o _ .mA .■ O

m ^ n

Nl NVIN0SH1II/YS S3 I 9V9 9 n~LI B RAR I E S ^SMITHSON IAN ""INSTITUTION
z _ _ co z: w - <£ z 2

< S .' .^!0\ v- f? .^S||A “

z
O
CO

> -^r I ^ >

ES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ' NO 1101 11SN I NVINOSHIIWS^SS I 9V9 8 1 1
co _ <0 ” . co

co

c
0

N I ^NVI N0SH1I INS ^ S 3 I d V9 9 11 ^Ll B R AR I £S^ SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION
I 1- v z r- Z ■”

ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION N0U.niU.SNI NVIN0SH1IWS SBiavaan

ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOULfUllSNI NVIN0SH1IWS S3 I ava a IT