I do not think there are any weavers in Australia.
Weavers in zoos
- Thread starter vogelcommando
- Start date
I'm not entirely sure on their status. I've never seen paradise whydahs, I think I missed them at San Diego. I do know that they are a couple other zoos, though. Only at one institution have I seen pintailed whydahs- Sylvan Heights Bird Park.
At least untill the late 1990ties several weaver-species were kept and bred by aviculturists in Australia :
Comoro weaver - prop. not pure anymore but hybrinate with Madagascar fodies.
Grenadies weaver
Madagascar fody
Napoleon weaver
Orange Bishop weaver
All these species have been bred in Australia for generations but I don't know how the founder-numbers were and if they are still all represented in Australia.
Would also be intresting to know if any of the public collections are keeping ( and breeding ) any of these species ).
Antwerp Zoo had a very succesfull Weaver-breeding season this year, 3 different species raised chicks :
Vieillot's weaver
Red-billed quelea
Village weaver
Vieillot's weaver
Red-billed quelea
Village weaver
Zygodactyl
Well-Known Member
What makes you think that? It seems to me like other brood parasites would be possible to raise when their host species are also kept.
With black-headed ducks, they make their hosts incubate the eggs but not feed the chicks, putting very little strain on the host species.
With cuckoos, if they tolerate handling they might actually be good for private breeders, since often aviculturalists hand-rear birds anyways, and they seem a good size for a pet. (Of course most of the really interesting-looking cuckoos are non-brood-parasitic.) I suppose the question is whether they're drawn to nest and habitat (which you might mimic without keeping the host species) or whether you would actually need the host species present to get them to lay.
I'd actually be really curious to try raising honeyguides myself (though they're too dull-looking to feature at a zoo). Assuming I get the time, money, and land to take up aviculture, I really want to try to raise barbets (including some species not currently kept; they're still legal to import from the wild in the US). Since barbets are favored victims of the honeyguides and they leave only one egg per nest, it wouldn't be too taxing on barbets with an unlimited food supply in their aviary to raise honeyguide chicks as well.
The issue with brood parasites, at least passerine ones - I had forgotten about the black headed duck - is the time and resource investment in establishing a self sustaining captive population. I agree many nest parasites may have been occasionally raised in captivity, especially by researchers, but at a guess you would need a population of the host species at least 10x the size of the parasitic ones to provide a suitable choice of hosts, as in most of the cases of nest parasitism I am aware of they are very selective in picking a host in exactly the right stage of the nesting cycle when the female is looking to lay her own eggs. With the waxbills that are the hosts of whydahs they are comparatively small and easier to breed, so the host availability problem is less of an issue.
White-winged widowbird Euplectes albonotatus also had an introduced population in Australia (not sure that it still exists). Is it possible that they might still be held by Aust aviculturalists?
Most host-species for cuckoos are not common in captivity and therefore where will your cuckoos lay their eggs before you hand-raise them? Next to this most insectivorous do not make good pets for most people. The diet and feces will put of most people already and I would question cuckoos make good pets at all. Also there is a cultural component here as in Europe hand-raising is generally frowned upon by aviculturtists. Also culturally is that from a European perspecitive you do not need much space to be an aviculturist. The European avicultural scene is still more a hobby-scene than the one you see in the US, which is more business oriented, even though the professionalism can be as high.
Having taken care for the European cuckoo several times I can tell they are not realy fitted to be kept in captivity. First of all, the changes of breeding them are very small because also the host-species are kept in small numbers and bred in even smaller numbers !
Secondly in Western Europe, the European cuckoo is a migration species and during the autumn they will become very restless and flying against the enclosure-wire all the time !
I guess it would be good in this case to keep our hands off of trying to keep this species
Secondly in Western Europe, the European cuckoo is a migration species and during the autumn they will become very restless and flying against the enclosure-wire all the time !
I guess it would be good in this case to keep our hands off of trying to keep this species
Zygodactyl
Well-Known Member
I wasn't thinking of trying the European cuckoo anyways, since each female cuckoo needs a specific host species which would make breeding it difficult. I was thinking it might be interesting to try some of the more interesting-looking brood-parasitic cuckoo species, like the thick-billed cuckoo or the American brood-parasitic cuckoos. However like I said, if I were to try breeding brood parasites, my first attempt would be with honeyguides. Not because they're particularly interesting (they're not), but because they parasitize barbets, which I want to try to keep anyways.
If hobby aviculture is more popular in Europe than in the US, I imagine that a lot of it has to do with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. With birds you have to keep exotics species, and only small finches, doves, and parrots are commonly bred. After that you're mostly looking at either expensive species which have intrigued people enough to breed in captivity (such as toucans and hornbills) or imports for the wild.
In the US, hand-raising is not frowned on; in fact it's essential for most parrots, toucans, and mousebirds if you want to keep them as house pets. Do people only keep these birds to look at in Europe? However I have a book by a British author which criticizes hand-raising, and I assume his complaints are the normal European complaints. His first complaint is that loosing broods makes parents neurotic, which may or may not be true in some cases but doesn't apply to brood parasites. His second complaint is that hand-raising imprints birds on humans, making them sexually attracted to humans rather than the species that raises them. Aside from the fact that I think this is a rather silly complaint, it definitely doesn't apply to brood parasites.
Frankly, I've noticed that Europe tends to have a bias towards the "natural," without consideration of whether "natural" is better. You've banned GMOs EU-wide based on widespread concerns about "Frankenfoods" and no evidence whatsoever, and this same author argues that parrots should be fed seed-based diets (as opposed to pellets) despite the fact that parrots on seed-based diets will pick out only their favorite seeds, leading to vitamin deficiencies in many cases.
I also don't see why insectivorous birds should be any more difficult than insectivorous reptiles assuming you breed your own food (as a lot of reptile keepers do), and assuming they don't need to catch their prey on the wing (like swifts and nightjars).
If hobby aviculture is more popular in Europe than in the US, I imagine that a lot of it has to do with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. With birds you have to keep exotics species, and only small finches, doves, and parrots are commonly bred. After that you're mostly looking at either expensive species which have intrigued people enough to breed in captivity (such as toucans and hornbills) or imports for the wild.
In the US, hand-raising is not frowned on; in fact it's essential for most parrots, toucans, and mousebirds if you want to keep them as house pets. Do people only keep these birds to look at in Europe? However I have a book by a British author which criticizes hand-raising, and I assume his complaints are the normal European complaints. His first complaint is that loosing broods makes parents neurotic, which may or may not be true in some cases but doesn't apply to brood parasites. His second complaint is that hand-raising imprints birds on humans, making them sexually attracted to humans rather than the species that raises them. Aside from the fact that I think this is a rather silly complaint, it definitely doesn't apply to brood parasites.
Frankly, I've noticed that Europe tends to have a bias towards the "natural," without consideration of whether "natural" is better. You've banned GMOs EU-wide based on widespread concerns about "Frankenfoods" and no evidence whatsoever, and this same author argues that parrots should be fed seed-based diets (as opposed to pellets) despite the fact that parrots on seed-based diets will pick out only their favorite seeds, leading to vitamin deficiencies in many cases.
I also don't see why insectivorous birds should be any more difficult than insectivorous reptiles assuming you breed your own food (as a lot of reptile keepers do), and assuming they don't need to catch their prey on the wing (like swifts and nightjars).
Actually keeping native species has been banned in several countries in Europe as well, although that ban has been lifted in most of them again. So I do not think that has anything to do with it, but lack of space and a working-culture that allows people much more free time and more security might have in my view. I know hand-raising is not frowned upon in the US, but to be fair it is not needed at all to keep birds as pets. Actually it is quite easy to socialise parrots after they fledged. Also in the case of mynahs it is not needed at all. Toucans and mousebirds are not available as pets here as most captive-bred birds go to other breeders. The problem with hand-raising is that too many people don't know what they are doing so you get indeed birds who are socially incapable of interacting with their own species. This creates behavioural problems making them unsuitable for breeding and even as a pet. So in Europe this has created resistance to hand-rearing and in one country, Netherlands, it is even forbidden unless it is needed to safeguard the health of the chick. And I didn't write that insectivorous birds are more difficult to keep, just that their diet and feces makes them unsuitable for most people as they do not want to deal with live-feed and feces that are smelly. For the same reason mynahs became less popular as pets as their feces stink too much. For most ordinary households parrots, canaries and finches are what they can handle due to the commitments they are willing to make.
Not at a zoo but evenso very intresting reading :
https://journals.tdl.org/watchbird/index.php/watchbird/article/download/2064/2035
https://journals.tdl.org/watchbird/index.php/watchbird/article/download/2064/2035
Video about hand-raising Mauritius fodies :
Mauritius fody video - Foudia rubra - 15a | ARKive
Mauritius fody video - Foudia rubra - 15a | ARKive
Perhaps it is worth pointing out that Village Weaver P.cucullatus is naturalised in Spain and Portugal. Northern Red Bishop and Yellow Crowned Bishop may also be breeding in the same areas, but I am not sure if they are established yet. Orange Bishop is established in southern California. Any other areas where weavers have been introduced?
Village weaver has been intoduced at least also in Mauritius and Hispaniola and there are some intresting studies made of the behaviour-changes of the different populations :
David C. Lahti: Research