310 Dr. E. Hopkinson—More Additions to Breeding Records


MORE ADDITIONS TO BREEDING RECORDS


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


[Continued from A.M., 1933, pp. 137, 396 )


So many more records have accumulated since the last collection

appeared in 1932 and 1933 that I think it as well to issue a further

instalment, before the numbers get too unwieldy to handle. In doing

so I wish to thank those who have complied with my request to help

with additions and corrections, and repeat that request here. But

better still will not someone go further into the subject and produce

another and fuller Records of Birds Bred in Captivity. Mine, although

only published in 1926, I realize (probably better than others), is now

getting out of date ; the volume of the additions which have already

appeared in the Magazine alone proves that. More information, too

(if it can be found), is desirable, particularly as to the length of life

captive-bred birds attain and how often. The number of records

must now be near a thousand, but in how many of them have (1) the

young lived to moult or reach (say) six months old ? (2) In how many

have full clutches been reared ? (3) How many species have been bred

to a second generation and/or further ? One must have noticed that

so many records read “ a fine youngster (or youngsters) now flying

in the aviary, quite independent of its parents ” or words to that

effect and in most cases a month or less after flying, always in the

same season. One does occasionally see, it is true, “ the so-and-so bird,

I bred three years ago here, is still alive and flourishing,” but how very

occasionally ! It is only natural that the record should be made early,

but this very fact alone tells against real accuracy and gives none of

the very important information required. My own idea (and this

probably optimistic) is that perhaps 50 per cent would (or might)

come under No. 1, 20 per cent under No. 2, and, excluding the Canary,

Budgerigar, and perhaps Bengalese, duck, game birds, etc., 5 per cent

under No. 3.


Then again, as regards British birds, a correspondent says I must

now include these as commonly bred for there is just as good evidence

now in the Fancy papers of their breeding as that on which I have

relied hitherto, namely the advertisements of aviary-bred close-ringed



