Owning an exotic bird

C

Celeith

New Member
Hey everyone, I just have a question regarding exotic birds here in Australia. I read that all exotic birds need to have a trail of origin to prove they are legal, and that the trail must have gone threw the NEBRS. What happens if the original bird it was bred from was imported before 1950 import ban But was never registered with NEBRS.

I hope to hear replies from people in order to shed some light on this subject.
 
Exotic birds dont need licenses, only native ones.

For example Canadian and Egyptian geese dont need licenses but Cape Barren and Magpie geese do.
 
You may have a problem though i you suddenly have a species which is thought not to exist in Australia. You may have to prove it was not illegally imported.
 
Well the bird is a high interest non-native bird that is listed under CITES. The Australian environment website states that a permit will be required. So my question is, will I still be able to prove its origin even though it was never registered with NEBRS, or would It be disregarded and considered as an illegal import straightaway.
 
Only specific species need to have provable backgrounds, not "all exotic birds", and a permit is not generally required of any of the legal exotic species kept privately. The government website is actually quite clear on what is or is not required in proving legality of a specific bird: Proving legal possession of exotic birds - Wildlife trade and conservation in Australia.

Celeith said:
Well the bird is a high interest non-native bird that is listed under CITES. The Australian environment website states that a permit will be required. So my question is, will I still be able to prove its origin even though it was never registered with NEBRS, or would It be disregarded and considered as an illegal import straightaway.
Click to expand...
I think you may be confusing import permits with a permit for keeping the bird. You last sentence is unanswerable -- how would anyone here know whether you can prove the birds origin? Read the government website I provided the link to.
 
Check out the lists accessible from this page:

2007 Inventory of Exotic (non-native) Bird Species known to be in Australia - Wildlife trade and conservation publications

If the species of your bird is not listed, the bird will be regarded as not being in Australia legally.

If the species is listed, but wildlife authorities suspect your bird was recently smuggled, they may demand evidence the bird or its ancestors were in the country prior to 2007.

CITIES relates to international trade, so is only relevant if you are trying to export the bird.
 
Last edited:
There are some very interesting species on the list that I quite sure they are not in Australia:

Cyanoramphus unicolor?!!

And are there Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha in Australia (I m doubting if I have seen pictures of them or not)?
 
DDcorvus said:
There are some very interesting species on the list that I quite sure they are not in Australia:

Cyanoramphus unicolor?!!

And are there Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha in Australia (I m doubting if I have seen pictures of them or not)?
Click to expand...
yes the list is not exactly accurate! There are several species on it which I doubt were ever in Australia, and others which were most definitely not still present in 2007. Apparently there are no thick-billed parrots left in Australia.
 
DDcorvus said:
There are some very interesting species on the list that I quite sure they are not in Australia:

Cyanoramphus unicolor?!!

And are there Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha in Australia (I m doubting if I have seen pictures of them or not)?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the list is not a list of species in Australia, but a list of species that could be in Australia. Thus they took account of historical records as well.
 
It would help if we knew which species we are discussing.

:p

Hix
 
Hix said:
It would help if we knew which species we are discussing.
Click to expand...
it would but then there wouldn't be any deliberate vagueness in the questioning would there? :p

I'm guessing .... Indian ringneck :D
 
MRJ said:
As I understand it, the list is not a list of species in Australia, but a list of species that could be in Australia. Thus they took account of historical records as well.
Click to expand...
apparently they took account of preserved skins and feathers also. Hence some of the dodgy inclusions.
 
Chlidonias said:
it would but then there wouldn't be any deliberate vagueness in the questioning would there? :p

I'm guessing .... Indian ringneck :D
Click to expand...

I was thinking Agapornis fischeri......

:p

Hix
 
What would be so special about an Indian Ringneck? I'm very fond of them, but what would be the Australian angle?
 
nothing special about ringnecks at all, common as muck :p (it was just joking because of the vague questioning by someone who obviously only had a passing idea of the requirements).
 
Owning...

Makes sense now, although I have no problem with Ringnecks, common things in general, or muck.
 
I quite like ringnecks myself. I'm not a big fan of mutations in general, but in ringnecks they actually look really nice (the blue and lutino at least).
 
Owning...

Couldn't agree more. Such an elegant bird looks good in blue, yellow or the original green. White is just boring like any other white bird. The more subtle mutations don't do a lot for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top