Abstract
Dear Mr. Dingle:
On behalf of the American Cockatiel Society, I wish to express our sincere thanks to you and the staff of AF A Watchbird for presenting my notice of the 1st National Cockatiel Specialty Show in its entirety, and in a most attractive format. The support and goodwill shown ACS by AFA and other avicultural organizations is deeply appreciated by all the members.
On a more personal note, I would like to express my appreciation for your excellent magazine. I look forward to each issue and particularly enjoy your editorial comments - you have a flair for witty, amusing answers as well as solid information. In my Apr/May issue, referring to the letter signed F .J .A., Islip, New York, I can only say that I would consider it a great pleasure and honor if I had the privilege of meeting this person. To his letter and your very apropo answer, I will only add a hearty "Amen."
Best regards and keep up the good work.
Sincerely, Jo Hall
ACS Show Co-ordinator
In response to
PERILS OF BUYING IMPORTED BIRDS Dec/Jan '78 Watchbird by Dr. R. Baer
Dear Sir:
I read with interest Dr. Baer's article "The Perils of Buying Imported Birds" in the Dec./Jan. WATCHBIRD. I'm afraid I cannot agree with him totally, neither in regard to the causes of the problems, nor the solutions.
I agree that is is a shame when someone's collection of birds dies as a result of exposure to a new bird, but, to introduce a recently acquired bird into an aviary without careful evaluation of the bird as well as further quarantine, is not a wise thing to do.
I also feel it is not fair to blame all the disease problems on importers and smugglers. How long do you think an importer would stay in business if no one bought his birds? It is the aviculturist who is looking for the "barbain" bird who aggravates some of these problems, by not being willing to pay for proper evaluation of the bird's health.
If a bird were to be kept an additional thirty days following the quarantine, the cost would be increased by 65 cents per day, or approximately $20.00 per bird.
If you wanted to continue to the extreme to guarantee a healthy bird, one needs to do the following on each:
1. Complete physical examination.
2. Complete parasitie examination.
a. Blood.
b. Feces
(I) Smear. (2) Flotation.
3. Bacteriological examination.
a. Salmonella titer.
b. Gram stain.
c. Culture & sensitivity. (Ten days on the indicated drug.) (The most common problem in parrots, for example, is pseudomonas, which is sensitive only to the most expensive injectible antibiotics.)
4. Virus studies.
(It is very difficult to guarantee a bird to be virus free - even Newcastle's has been carried by a healthy parrot for several hundred days; there may be carrier birds of Pachecos.)
5. Paired blood samples on each psittacine to be sent to the Hooper Foundation Lab for psittacosis titers OR putting the bird on tetracycline for 45 days.
6. Parasite treatments. (Some are very difficult to treat, for example, blood parasites.)
All of the above would add greatly to the cost of the bird, and most aviculturists would not pay it, even if it meant more of a guarantee of a healthy bird.
Dr. Baer inferred in the article that dealers would unload known sick birds as soon as possible no matter what the consequences might be to the avicultural society. My experience has been that dealers are becoming more conscientious as the competition becomes keener.
Perhaps it is the A.F .A.'s responsibility to help in this endeavor, by refusing to accept advertising from dealers who knowingly release sick birds to market. Perhaps a program of inspection and certification of approval could be set up to help police the industry from within.
The individual aviculturist can get involved in a positive way by:
1 . Letting suppliers know that they are only going to settle for healthy birds and they will be willing to pay for them.
2. Work together as a group to certify dealers and eliminate advertising in the Watchbird of unreputable dealers.
3. Financially contribute to research on avian diseases.
4. Work more closely with avian veterinarians to establish preventative programs.
5. Patronize the best suppliers - offer club recognition, awards, etc.
6. Set up an additional 30-day quarantine before introducing a new bird into a collection.
I definitely feel that it is not wise to expect the USDA or APHIS to solve our problems - we need less government intervention, not more. (It certainly is not realistic to expect a 90 days' overseas quarantine to be enforced.) Good importers are now holding birds for 30 days . overseas anyway. We should become so 1 conscientious as an industry that we can police ourselves far more effectively.
By their own admission, the Federal agencies are not set up to regulate caged and aviary birds. Even Dr. Baer spoke out against the USDA in the VVND outbreak last year.
However, I agree that we should be represented on the U.S.A.H.A. and that we should enforce the Code of Ethics. I feel the A.F .A. should follow steps initiated by the First International Symposium on Captive Birds held in Seattle, March 7-12, 1978, where they agreed to publish a list of guilty smugglers and their affiliation.
I also agree on being more selective in ; our breeding programs. Each of us should I choose a problem species and concentrate · our best efforts on breeding that.
At this time, veterinary health certifi-
cates for each bird would be very diffi. cult to implement. The primary reason is ! that there are very few veterinarians qualified to diagnose a bird's condition of health. For example, the 1978 graduating class of a leading veterinary school in the South only had a one-day course on caged birds. They would hardly be considered qualified unless they went on to get some experience on their own.
This whole letter boils down to the fact that we as aviculturists can upgrade the profession of aviculture ourselves and eliminate these perils of buying imported birds. We can set up a program of licensing or certification of club members according to a vi culture expertise; we can discourage certain species of birds from being imported if they prove to be disease carriers; we can follow the example of the pet industry group ("PIJAC") and IBI (International Bird Institute) and . donate money to help solve the problems. These two groups have given some $50,000 to three institutions to study the diagnosis and prevention of psittacosis and Pacheco's disease.
So, in summary, the government ! should not be asked to "solve" our problems, but we should solve our own by being smarter, practicing disease prevention in our own aviaries like we want the dealers to do, spending money on known healthy birds, reporting the "clean dealers" so they can be exalted, and pay our fair share of the research need to solve this many-faceted problem of bird importation.
We can do it if we do it together!
Sincerely yours, Greg G. Harrison. D.V.M.