SPIX in a BOX...
- Thread starter Pertinax
- Start date
Here's a link Near-extinct macaws return to Brazil
It's great to see the number of Spix's Macaws numbers rising, I just question the wisdom of moving them to Brazil and and the possibility of of reintroduction during the current anti-environmental political climate.
Funds are already being slashed why burden the system further.
And if the future of their habitat has a asterisk next to it is really wise to risk any of the gene pool.
It's great to see the number of Spix's Macaws numbers rising, I just question the wisdom of moving them to Brazil and and the possibility of of reintroduction during the current anti-environmental political climate.
Funds are already being slashed why burden the system further.
And if the future of their habitat has a asterisk next to it is really wise to risk any of the gene pool.
I hope they master the release methods on a commoner macaw species, for example local red-bellied macaws, before releasing any precious Spix macaw.
Release of captive parrots often ends in disaster because of predation. The project with Thick-billed Parrots in Arizona was abandoned. For the Puerto Rican Parrots, people developed very complicated methods. It involved releasing young as a group and training them beforehand using falconry hawks and even showing them how a falconry hawk captured another parrot species wearing a protective vest.
Release of captive parrots often ends in disaster because of predation. The project with Thick-billed Parrots in Arizona was abandoned. For the Puerto Rican Parrots, people developed very complicated methods. It involved releasing young as a group and training them beforehand using falconry hawks and even showing them how a falconry hawk captured another parrot species wearing a protective vest.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
My thoughts and fears exactly. The current government of this country is an utter catastrophe (In every sense : Environmental, social, economical and political) and a total farce / joke.
I will grant that the caatinga is by no means under the same continuous pressures / stressors as the Amazon, Cerrado or Atlantic rainforest (though far reaching impacts of climate change on the biome are on the horizon). However, I do not think this is the time to be reintroducing this species back into the wild and the timing of this move is in my opinion awful to say the least.
Last edited:
I never have understand why seemed to be so much rush on return the Spix to the wild. I don´t think the population is big enough to send a third part of it to a country that is clearly against environment protection. I don´t know if people there is willing to help on the Spix´s reintroduction, but I´m sure they´ll become a main target for poachers. Apart of the natural risks like predation or fails on adaptation to the wild. In fact, I don´t think is safe to keep the population in only three places (or maybe I´m wrong and other facilities apart of ACTP, Pairi and now this enclosure in Brazil keeps them?). An infectious disease, a fire or something similar on any of them and a big part of the population would be lost.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
The first point you make is a valid one and especially in regards to the current administration of the Brazilian government which is as you have correctly stated is very much against any kind of conservation of biodiversity or ecosystems. The only thing the Bolsonaro administration is actually interested in is crass economical gain at a catastrophic ecological, social, economical and political cost while modelling the country heavily on Trump's America.
The problem is that this particular government is slashing funding left , right and centre to science which is crippling conservation interventions. However, on a positive note this drive to reintroducing the spix macaw to the wild will be heavily funded and monitored by international organizations which I suppose (and hope) will reduce the inherent difficulties faced by other Brazilian initiatives / interventions at conservation.
The second point you make is much more complex. There has obviously been a lot of capacity building of conservation in the caatinga , environmental education / outreach work with communities (not just within the region but throughout Brazil and the Spix macaw is known by almost every child at school) in the two decades since the extinction of the species in the wild. There have also been boots on the ground drives to mitigate and combat poaching of birds for the illegal pet trade and interception of these illegal traffic networks and I am sure these will continue closely into the future.
Basically in conclusion: Hard lessons have been learned since the species went extinct in the wild and this reintroduction is not likely to be a "Mickey mouse" type conservation intervention. Nevertheless, this move comes at incredibly crap timing and the idiocy of the current government is not likely to help matters moving forward.
Last edited:
Apparently there are processes to 'train' the birds prior to their release, to get them fully fit and educate against predation and eat the foods they will find in the wild etc. However there must be many other dangers- poaching again for one, the reintroduced female from some years back died from hitting powerlines etc. We can only wait and watch with some trepidation to see how successful this turns out, but with only circa 150 birds in existence, I think it is perhaps a premature move also. I am sure at least some of them will be inevitably be lost very quickly after initial reintroduction, which with such a small population is not a good outcome.
I also agree the remaining captive birds should certainly be distributed more evenly among more holders, to remove the dangers you outline. 'Too many eggs in one basket...'
Dear esteemed Pertinax, we can talk, talk and talk as we like and not try at all to conserve or reintroduce species. At some point, it is going to have to give and we might as well do it.
Another recent example is/was the dama gazelle in Chad.
In the case of the Spix's macaw, there is living by example from past bad project management to the current more informed trajectory for which I am far more hopeful of its eventual success. And this even in the context of a right-wing (almost dictatorial) Bolsonaro administration in Brasil here.
Most certainly since there has been widespread public engagement locally in their original habitat and support for the new Spix's macaw project. People are proud of their ambassadors. And thankfully the Brasilian conservation community is not all hostage to the alienated from the environment destructive policies at the national level with henchmen of the current administration in key position (often non-expert and from quarters absolutely without any professional credibility) of both national policy institutes as well as - essentially - NGO's.
Another recent example is/was the dama gazelle in Chad.
In the case of the Spix's macaw, there is living by example from past bad project management to the current more informed trajectory for which I am far more hopeful of its eventual success. And this even in the context of a right-wing (almost dictatorial) Bolsonaro administration in Brasil here.
Most certainly since there has been widespread public engagement locally in their original habitat and support for the new Spix's macaw project. People are proud of their ambassadors. And thankfully the Brasilian conservation community is not all hostage to the alienated from the environment destructive policies at the national level with henchmen of the current administration in key position (often non-expert and from quarters absolutely without any professional credibility) of both national policy institutes as well as - essentially - NGO's.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
True , but things are getting worse all the time and I well imagine some future point when we do become hostage to the current administration / budding dictatorship.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Not sure if anyone saw / posted this already but here is a bit more information on the proposed move to reintroduce the species back to the wild and the organization behind it.
It is actually a lot worse than I thought and the organization seems dodgy as ****.
Spix’s macaw returns to Brazil, but is overshadowed by controversy
It is actually a lot worse than I thought and the organization seems dodgy as ****.
Spix’s macaw returns to Brazil, but is overshadowed by controversy
Sorry, but the journal piece in Mongabay is a bit old hat and repeat of past accusations and remarks made by anonymous sources are not exactly the most reliable. I personally think it is bordering on the slanderous what is put together in the feature.
Dr. Paul Reillo may be a respected conservationist, but I wonder what his issue is with ATCP exactly. The raising of an - anonymous - biologist ex Brasil is not quite a good source either.
First and foremost, on physical evidence the Brasil led effort to save the Spix's macaw at home had failed prior to the ATCP effort and Dr. Cromwell Purchase has for years led the scientific department at Al Wabra and is spearheading a project lead now.
And to be truthful, yes in Brasil only the zoo in Sao Paulo and its affiliated breeding farm - mentioned in the MGB piece have bred the birds and not in the numbers either ATCP or Al Wabra have mustered. Think the low ten. There is good cooperation between ATCP/ICMBio and Zoo Sao Paulo to make up good pairings and now a third of the population has been moved up to the Curaca Breeding Station - which is a breeding farm and site from which the releases will take place.
And the end result, .... if you can look in the glazed box that is Bolsonaro's Brasil and how conservation is having to deal with the Devil in the current climate ...., well be our guest. For the moment, this ATCP/Curaca/ICMBio effort seems to be the first real and credible initiative to bring back the Spix's macaw to the wild and create a sustainable wild population once again.
Note: Please rest assured this is not a personality affront, but it is a personal critique of a story that keeps being (dead) parroted about - note the pun intended - without much concrete evidence on the ground ... other than some vague accusations and insinuations towards a German national and his organisation (which for all intense purposes has managed to breed some of the most threatened psittacine species where other "experienced" aviculturists and even zoos have failed to do so or after long years of no progress and breeding simply lost interest in them altogether.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Dont worry, I most definitely do not take what you wrote as a personal affront and I agree with large parts of what you wrote. I agree that with Bolsonaro in power these are challenging times for conservation and any ambitious project like the one in question is most definitely going to face an uphill struggle in achieving any objectives and should at least in theory deserve our support.
I also agree that in the absence of any great successes by NGO's and zoos in breeding the spix macaw within Brazil and led by Brazilians (and I'll agree with you that this in itself indicative of some rather endemic problems in conservation here) ex-situ efforts abroad have met with a greater success and fully deserve to be commended for this. I would genuinely like to believe that the organization in question is run on sound moral/ethical principles and that it is dedicated to bringing the spix macaw back to the wild.
However, I'm personally far far less inclined to discount anonymous voices / sources off the bat regarding criticism of organizations or insider information even if it would appear at first glance to be "slanderous". True, these could just be a variety of "bad actors" whether disgruntled former employees or Brazilian conservationists who are jealous or embittered by being sidelined / not playing a more prominent role in this historic reintroduction effort.
Nevertheless, as someone who has seen some pretty abyssmal conduct within numerous (Which I wont name) NGO's , zoos and even a prodigious research institute (and heard through the grapevine of much more of this) over the years and seen these same issues conveniently and repeatedly swept under the carpet and hushed up I am more likely to at the least hear these voices out and to give whistleblowers the benefit of the doubt. I would even go as far to say that I am in a general sense supportive of there being more whistle blowers within the field of conservation because sadly it is a field that to its great detriment is rife with abusive misconduct, corruption and negligence. If conservation is to succeed it absolutely needs to be run with more transparency and commitment to basic ethical guidelines and we need to do the hard groundwork of recognizing what we are willing to tolerate or confront and what areas we need to improve in terms of the human dimensions.
Furthermore, I didn't see the Mongabay story as a "hit piece" / "hatchet job" as such but rather a journalistic report that did try to show the issue from both sides. Ultimately in spite of the controversy the reintroduction effort will either succeed or fail and that is the main issue here and I for my part hope for the sake of the species that it succeeds. The controversy is another issue entirely but personally I believe it is one worthy of the scrutiny of journalists.
Last edited:
If there is an endemic issue within the Brasil conservation movement - as you seem to suggest - I am afraid ..., this can only be changed from within.
If present and former staff only appear as anons and are not willing to come forward and speak out publicly, they will never ever begin to address the issues you signal at hand ..., and nothing is going to change ever.
Questions:
Does this indicate something amiss with Brasil general and civil society? Might this resident evil than even pre-existed the current Bolsonaro anti-environment ilk ...?
Completely, unrelated ..., but somewhat in this vein you mentioned ... I know one case of a highly respected primatologist and Dutch national - van Roosmalen .... does this ring a bell. Highly respected science buff and spent blood, sweat and tears in the Amazon in Brasil and at the last call had to run from the country for dear life.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with you that this is a problem that does have to come predominately from within but it is an issue that is so very complex and connected to so many variables including politics, economics and even very sadly some aspects of the cultural mindset of people ( A huge number of Brazilian conservationists are also deeply guilty of this). All of these problems can create a negative feedback loop which can severely hamper efforts on the ground here and perpetuate mediocrity in terms of achieving real world conservation goals.However, I do think it can also be helped from outside of the country and this is why it is so critically important for foreign NGO's and Zoos to play a role in helping primarily with capacity building and training and to a lesser (but no less important) extent with exchanges , logistics and funding etc.
I also agree that at least in an ideal world there would be no need for whistleblowers and people wouldn't have to remain anonymous and would be able to voice their complaints or constructive criticism openly, however, this is exceedingly hard to do for a number of reasons. It is particularly difficult to encourage this in environments with toxic organizational cultures and in circumstances where individuals job security ,reputational standing, academic progress, mental / physical wellbeing or even their lives are threatened.
In regards to your question on Brazil I would have to say that this is a problem that sadly predates Bolsonaro and does have historical antecedents though it is complicated to explain and I'm not sure If I have understood it correctly but I'll have a go at answering it (Just bear in mind my answer is going to be inherently subjective / biased and also unavoidably reductive).
Many present attitudes can be traced to the times of the millitary dictatorship ( it ended in the 1980's) which many people here with fascist sympathies look upon with nostalgia as a period of stability but generally speaking this country has historically always leaned heavily towards the rightwing of the political spectrum (It was a colony run by a Portuguese monarch long after the other Nations of South America had thrown out their Spanish oppressors). However, the other problem here is one that certainly has its roots in the colonial Portuguese and post colonial mindset with the role of the economically prosperous Southern states of the country driving forth to exploit the richer environments of the North , West, and Central regions (driven by a belief / delusion / quasi-mythology that there were / are infinite natural resources to plunder endlessly) to generate wealth.
Add on top of this many cultural norms which are deeply conflict avoidant and socially conservative ( Extremely unlike those of the Nations of Hispanic Latin America which are in my opinion far freer and in fact superior in this regard). Brazilian society is therefore largely geared towards a stultifying societal social conformity and group think rather as opposed to open discussion or allowing for room for progressive and constructive dissent / cognitive diversity. All of these factors have the potential and frequently are very bad / unhealthy for both a thriving democracy and the conservation of biodiversity in equal measure.
Last edited:
I feel for you men and women.
Sorry, this thread has turned upside down (The Box is out of the Spix).
PS: I do not wish to use the name of the German natural historian with any disrespect.
Sorry, this thread has turned upside down (The Box is out of the Spix).
PS: I do not wish to use the name of the German natural historian with any disrespect.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Yes, worrying times indeed for Brazil, democracy and conservation here.
Haha, indeed !
Well despite some of my mistrust and suspicion of the organization in question I do think it is at least quite fitting / ironic that as a German naturalist (though I am thinking that a Prussian would be a more accurate term) scientifically discovered the species that Germans may well succeed in restoring the species back to the wild after its disappearance.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Actually I think it is completely related and I'm glad you brought the case of Van Roosmalen up as it is deeply relevant (Never met him personally, though know of a few people who do and of course I'm familiar with his work in Amazonia). I think that the terrible situation that happened to him is deeply illustrative of the social / cultural problems I've described above.
In his case if I remember correctly it was probably a hellish mix of jealousy / envy from an academic colleague dressed up as beaurocracy and concerns of "biopiracy" that led to his situation. Yes, it does indeed happen and is very disturbing. This is a country where being a conservationist will almost always lead to you being ostracized and going against the current (Including among "fellow conservationists") and can quite easily either land you in jail or lead to an untimely and violent death.
Last edited:
I am more worried that there is zero previous experience of reintroducing macaws to the wild, and releases of other parrot species ended in disaster. I can only hope that they practice release on similar Red-bellied Macaw, instead of starting with precious Spix and watching them perish.
Concering egos: weird that Brazil has only too many endangered species to take care, and people are fighting for a piece of money and publicity of Spix Macaw project.
Concering egos: weird that Brazil has only too many endangered species to take care, and people are fighting for a piece of money and publicity of Spix Macaw project.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Yes , true , Brazil does have an enormous number of vulnerable, endangered and critically endangered species other than the spix macaw. I also have no doubt that there is a lot of egotism involved in this project (there always is in any conservation intervention and often in toxic quantities). This is going to be the case for both the Brazilians and the Germans and I am sure both are guilty of doing this.
Regarding the perennial issue of fighting over money / funding and publicity I dont know how familiar you are with the way things work in conservation but in my experience this is a situation hardly limited to Brazil (though it is undeniably a huge problem here). You will basically find the same interpersonal issues of people fighting over finite and limited funding and media attention absolutely everywhere in the world. Here's a thought, maybe governments should be throwing as much funding at conserving species and ecosystems as they are currently at trying to beat the coronavirus ?
Again, there needs to be a paradigm shift within conservation that moves away from perpetuating a vicious and nihilistic cycle of cuthroat competition and towards a much greater emphasis on collaboration. I've said many times on this forum that I believe that this is an enormous existential problem within the field of conservation (perhaps the biggest one in my opinion) and one that only ends up preventing goals from being reached and ultimately negatively impacts the species themselves. Some of it is just part of the human condition and will always be around but that cannot be permitted to become some tired old cliché that both justifies **** poor ethical behaviour and gives organizations the mediocre excuse to shrug their shoulders and do nothing to address these underlying issues.
Change is long overdue and desperately needs to be promoted at all levels from academic / scientific research to field based NGO's and even in zoos. If nothing is changed these sort of situations it will continue to stymie and stall progress in reaching conservation goals by fueling petty interpersonal conflicts. It will also drive young conservationists (who will be desperately needed in the next half a century in the ongoing biodiversity crisis) out of the field for good.
Last edited: