Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!cognos!stewartw
From: stewartw@cognos.UUCP (Stewart Winter)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Cdn Parrot Symposium: Orenstein Speech
Message-ID: <9727@cognos.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jun 91 22:25:30 GMT
References: <9718@cognos.UUCP> <2853F31E.2CEA@intercon.com>
Reply-To: stewartw@cognos.UUCP (Stewart Winter)
Organization: Cognos Inc., Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 67

In article <2853F31E.2CEA@intercon.com> kdb@intercon.com (Kurt Baumann) writes:
>However, I also believe that small numbers of birds need to be imported to help 
>keep the genetic pool diversified, and help to establish captive breeding

   I agree ... the proposals seem to allow for this, but I'm dubious about
the ability of 'small' breeders (like myself) to become involved in this
(outside of a consortium).  As an example, almost every Princess of Wales
parakeet I've seen has fragile health caused by inbreeding - we could use
genetic diversity, but of course it can not be had (although I fully respect
Australia's right to make that decision and I am in no way suggesting that
I disagree with their tough stance).

>programs, not just for the pet trade.  I also believe that what the US and 
>other countries ought to do is establish accredidation for "certified breeders"

   I'm curious about the kind of standards you would use to establish
AND MAINTAIN the accredation.  I simply doubt the ability of our government
(Canada) at least to be able to do this.  These programs cost money and
I wonder how well they would work.  (This topic is worth a discussion on
its own, but I think we best put 'INDOOR' in front of it)

>(hey I don't even think that ALL ZOO's should be allowed into this program)

   I agree ... not all zoos have the expertise to do this work.

>This would allow new breeding stock to be brought into countries, and keep it 
>humane.  On the other end, capture stations should sex birds and test for 
>overall health and fertility.

  Costs money to set this kind of thing up and requires a level of sophisticated
equipment not really available in many of the originating countries.

>Sorry for the terseness of this note, but that's my idea in a nutshell.  I 
>believe that this would work, even for countries who now allow NO exportation.

   The catch is that the process has to be carefully controlled - single
departure point - single arrival point; or we can't tell the good guys from
the bad guys.  This means that the commercial profits end up in a small 
number of hands.  While I don't mind seeing one responsible importer be
the beneficiary, I imagine infighting within the 'industry' would stop
it from ever happening (hope I'm wrong.)

>This would keep the population in the wild, and help establish a captive 
>population which could be tapped at some point to reestablish wild populations 
>if we as a species every figures out that we don't need to rape every acre of 
>land on this world.

   Re-releasing and re-establishing wild populations is very difficult.
(I wrote a long paragraph on this about a month ago).  It's certainly a
worthy goal, but we don't yet know whether or not it can be achieved.

>Oh, any "profits" from the sales of breeders could be 
>directly funnelled back to the exporting country earmarked for use in helping 
>study, manage, and preserve the wild flocks.

   It could be, although, I'm not sure what benevolent North American
company would do this (what cynicism).  If you looked at what amount
of profits pet stores, importers, etc., divert to proven wildlife
projects, I'm sure you'd discover that it's quite small ... not a lot
of longterm thinking going on by these folks yet.

  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