188 



18 October 1995 



Dale R. Thompson; Editor-in-Chief 

 American Federation of Aviculture 

 3118 West Thomas Road; #713 

 Phoenix, AZ 85017-5308 



Dear Mr. Thompson: 



I am writing to you regarding the article "Conservation and Aviculture* 

 by Rick Jordan. I find this article to be extremely inappropriate. Mr. 

 Jordan's statements are either based on misinformation or were purposefully 

 chosen so as to mislead readers in favor of the author's biased and erroneous 

 views. It is published as the Wild Bird Conservation Act (WBCA) is being ~- 

 reviewed in Congress for re-authorization. Mr. Jordan's reference to the WBCA 

 as "stupid" is unprofessional for the First Vice-President of AFA. 



At the same time that AFA representatives testified at a recent 

 Congressional Hearing stating that the U.S. government should fund biological 

 studies in the field (to conduct sustainable-use research progreims) , Mr. 

 Jordan outrageously criticizes studies already conducted on parrot species. 

 Mr. Jordan is misleading the readers of the AFA Watchbird by giving inaccurate 

 accounts of work done by several eminent scientists. For exan^le, he referred 

 to a study in the Bahamas ("...one isolated island...") as irresponsible and 

 useless. However, as a result of this study, the Bahamas government 

 established a National Park solely to protect this parrot subspecies from 

 extinction. Dr. Rosemarie Gnam's work was directly responsible for the 

 fruition of this park. 



I will not cite further examples in his article because they are too 

 numerous, and ludicrous. However, I will comment on the article as a whole. 

 The recurring theme is an attack on all research on parrots in the wild. Such 

 research, he claims, is wasteful; the only way to save species is to breed 

 them in captivity and maintain them in 'living museums'. This approach is 

 narrow-minded and gloomy. Is this the philosophical approach to conservation 

 that the AFA endorses? If so, it is pathetic. 



With this article, Mr. Jordan is pitting the conservation biologists and 

 aviculturists against each other. While at the end of his statement he claims 

 that conservation and aviculture can work together, I doubt that any 

 conservation field biologist would consider working together with 

 aviculturists such as Mr. Jordan after reading his inflammatory article. I 

 find Mr. Jordan's manner of communication deceitful to your readers. He is 

 trying to fire them up to support new amendments that would "gut" the WBCA, 

 rendering it ineffective for wild bird conservation. 



How can the AFA claim a conservation role when you publish articles such 

 as this? 



Sincerely, 



Dr. Patricia Wainright 

 Assistant Research Professor 

 Rutgers University 

 AFA Member 



cc: Drs . Rosemarie Gnam, Noel Snyder, James Wiley 

 Robert J. Berry and Dr. Benny Galloway 



Honorable James Saxton and Members of the House Subcommittee on 

 Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans 



