7 6



Review.



REVIEW.



PARRAKEETS*


With the present number Mr. Seth-Smith concludes his

interesting work on the Parrakeets suitable for aviculture.


From the point of view of the ordinary aviculturist the

parts increase in interest with every successive issue. There

will be a very general regret that the work has come to an end.

But as Mr. Seth-Smith has already found that fresh information

and one new importation have rendered an appendix necessary,

may we not hope, that a few years even will render an enlarge¬

ment, or, at any rate a continuation of the work, necessary ?


In this number we are at the opposite pole from the

earlier ones. There is much to be said against the Conures as

cage birds—not a little against the Eorikeets ; but who can say

anything against New Zealand Parrakeets, Turquoisines, and

Nymfihici ?


All we can wish is that Mr. Seth-Smith could have told us

more about them—about Nymphicus for instance. Why does

this bird live so short a time in captivity ? Why does it not do

as well as the Cockatiel ? Nor do I very well understand why

the Ground Parrakeet ( Pezoportis ) was never imported. I have

not only never seen it, but with the exception of the Zoological

Gardens, I have never even heard of any one having kept it.


If I may find a fault with the present part, it is that we

have not been given a coloured plate of this bird and of Geopsit

tac 7 is, which also I have never seen. But I do not think night

Parrots suitable for aviculture, and doubt if they would live long

caged.


Talking of plates, I have a criticism to make. Much as I

admire Mr. Goodchild’s drawings, the plate of Cyanorhamphus

u?iicolor is misleading as to its size. Look at auriceps and it;

would not one say they are of the same size from the plate ?

Yet auriceps is smaller than novce-zealaiidicz, while unicolor is



* Parrakeets, a handbook to the imported species, by D. Seth-Smith, F.Z.S., M.B.O.U.

Part VI. London: R. H. Pouter, 7, Princes Street, Cavendish Square, W.



