Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!cognos!stewartw
From: stewartw@cognos.UUCP (Stewart Winter)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Cdn Parrot Symposium: Orenstein Speech
Message-ID: <9718@cognos.UUCP>
Date: 9 Jun 91 22:38:25 GMT
Reply-To: stewartw@cognos.UUCP (Stewart Winter)
Organization: Cognos Inc., Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 99


First summary (as promised) of Canadian Parrot Symposium:

Why Aviculturalists Should Support Regulation of the Wild Bird Trade
   by Ron Orenstein, Project Director, Internation Wildlife Coalition

-----------------

  Mr. Orenstein started his talk by presenting facts that support his 
belief that trade in most birds will be elimiated by around 1996 with 
some exceptions for zoos.  (References to 2 bills before congress, in 
Europe, and at IUCN (World Conservation Union)).  His talk was aimed
at convincing aviculturalists to support these efforts and offered
proof that they would be good for us.

  Mr. Orenstein stated that the pet trade (through PIJAC) and
aviculturalists have been opposed to stopping the bird trade, and
have been highly emotional in their treatment of most proposals
regarding it.  These reactions have damaged the credibility of
aviculturalists within the conservation community.  Aviculturalists
must learn the diffence between attempted control of wild bird
trade (which would permit "managed import of small number of birds
that may be needed to establish or bolster captive gene pools") and 
control of aviculture (something only supported by fringe conservation
groups).

  His arguments against the wild bird trade (as it now exists) are
that it is wastefule and inhumane, that it reduces wild populations,
that it does not contribute sustantial income for local people, and that
there exists no proof of viability of sustainable wild bird trade.
The bird trade is practiced primarily in pristine habitats and "birds
disappear ... long before the habitat itself is threatened."  None of
these are "criticisms of responsible aviculture."

  He then suggested that some parrot breeders are finding it difficult
to compete with the wild bird trade (in terms of selling babies) and
cited an editorial in the Pionus Breeders Associations Newsletter.  He
went on to state that when a species is readily available (wild caught)
that less success is obtained in domestic breeding (because less effort
is applied).

  He went on to disuss the need for increased regulation.  He stated
that the current trade mechanisms (including CITES) were ineffective.
For example, in 1984 American records show 4820 birds exported to
Canada, and Canadian records show 587 birds imported from the United
States.  CITES II in particular has had little impact on smuggling.
(side note, Canada is now preparing legislation to permit it to deal
much better with controlling CITES listed species).  He suggested that
the "most effective way to improve enforcement would be an outright
ban on their [birds] import except under very special, carefully
controlled cirumstances."  "To be truly effective, though, a trade
ban must be international in scope."  He referred to a study by
Laura Simon that shows that the New York state law banning sale of
wild-caught birds had not been detrimental to the pet trade.  [sjw:
I think Gary Lilienthal had strong opposing view to this statement.]

  Regulation is coming and a "knee-jerk opposition to it will mean that
your views are not likely to be heard" and will be "seen by conservations
as self-serving."  Input into regulation bills could be important.  For
example, "I undestand that a bill introduced in Michigan, seeking to
restrict ownership of certain species of pet birds, actually sought to
differentiate for that purpose among colour morphs [colour mutations] of
lovebirds.  Ignorant drafting [of regulations] helps nobody."  Aviculturalists
are missing out on opportunities to help save rare parrots because they are
not trusted by the conservation community (example of Puerto Rican Parrot
was cited.) He argues that aviculturalists should be active in upholding
the law (whether they approve of it or not), and reporting and boycotting
unscrupulous dealers and importers.

   Aviculturalists should work actively within breeding consortiums 
(where personal owernship of the bird would be illegal).  "Those who can
help save rare species are trustees for all of us and should act accordingly."

---------------------------

  This summarizes most of his points.  It was a rather lengthy talk
and so some stuff has been chopped down quite a bit, but I think the
general idea comes across.  Personally, I think he makes a lot of good
points and I support the idea of a ban provided that it is not
beyond the patience of a small experienced breeder to go through the
process required to obtain an endangered bird.  Also, I imagine a great
deal of trouble in showing proof of domestic breeding (gene tests would
work, but they are very expensive).  But I think it is abundantly clear
that 3rd world countries do not have the resources to police their
wildlife resources, and that policework will have to be done in the
'target' countries.

  I'll try to write up Gary Lilienthal's talk next weekend ... it is
a bit shorter and the AFA certainly holds a more moderate position
that Mr. Orenstein.

  Stewart

  
-- 
Stewart Winter               Cognos Incorporated   S-mail: P.O. Box 9707
VOICE: (613) 738-1338 x3830  FAX: (613) 738-0002           3755 Riverside Drive
UUCP: stewartw%cognos.uucp@ccs.carleton.ca                 Ottawa, Ontario
The bird of the day is .... Green-Cheeked Conure           CANADA  K1G 3Z4