Correspondence



289



CORRESPONDENCE, NOTES, ETC.


THE PARROT BAN


I personally welcome both Mr. Porter’s and Mr. Webb’s articles and

also the correspondence (or rather some of the correspondence) which

their publication has caused. Undoubtedly the former free importation

of Parrots did create much cruelty and suffering, and the dealers only have

themselves to blame for the ban. Doubtless this will, in course of time, be

modified, but I cannot conceive how any person who really has the interests

of birds at heart can desire a return to the old conditions. Even now the

supplies of Parrots are far from being cut off, for besides the birds imported

with licences, there can be little doubt that a good many are still coming

in without them.


But I think Mr. Webb’s article is of more pressing importance to Avicul-

turists, although I do not agree entirely with all he says. As I have been

in the habit of going the round of the London bird shops with some regularity,

perhaps my experiences may be of interest to a few members.


I am convinced that so long as birds are imported in comparatively

small numbers to be sold retail by the dealers, there is little or no cruelty.

The birds usually arrive in good condition and are quickly disposed of, to

what one imagines are good homes. The trouble arises almost entirely, in

my opinion, when the birds are imported in very large numbers for selling

wholesale. Again, the birds usually arrive in fair condition but owing to

the large numbers are overcrowded in the dealers’ cages. This results in the

birds never having a chance to settle down, what with continual catching

operations, and because of the large numbers a good many are not sold very

quickly. They remain in the shops until inevitably disease sets in and

many birds perish miserably.


Sometimes this is due to ignorance or cupidity on the part of the dealers,

but obviously it is not always their fault. If one dealer imports in large

numbers to sell cheaply, others must follow his example or go out of business.

It is extremely difficult to know what the Society, as representative ofj all

that is best in British Aviculture, can do in the matter.


Mr. Sweetnam’s suggestions are, I think, very helpful and form afuseful

basis for discussion. I am, however, of the opinion that at present we can

place but little reliance on home-bred stocks of birds. Although a great

number are bred annually, the number of really capable breeders whose

aviary bred stock is worth breeding from again is extremely limited. Certainly

everything should be done to encourage better and more useful breeding,

but I do not think that the science of Aviculture has yet reached that stage

where home breeding can be regarded as at all efficacious.


I am afraid that for the Society to import birds for members would be of

little use in improving the bird trade, unless done on a very large scale,

which it cannot afford to do. A few members might be able to obtain birds

cheaply that they had not hitherto possessed, but such an operation would

have no effect on the bird trade as a whole.


What I should like to see would be an amplification of Mr. Sweetnam’s

second suggestion. I think that it would be an excellent idea if the Society

were to grant a Certificate, which would always be open to cancellation, to

those dealers from whom members could buy birds without the suspicion

that they had occasioned cruelty in so doing. Only holders of the Certificate



