UK Career aviculturists: It's time to dream again...

Hey, as ever, it's been a while since I wrote. I've had opportunities to write not only here, but elsewhere, but my desire to only write when I have something worth sharing has stuck fast. This last year I have seen a wild proliferation of the use of artificial intelligence to write not only online posts, but in some cases whole articles on bird keeping. To some degree this seems to cheapen the experience of reading about our craft. In that sense I have found myself reading more from my physical library, which represents the efforts of real humans, with a real passion, put forward in a time when producing such work required genuine effort and love for what we do.

Over this summer, I've tried to step away from the busy world of online society, whilst still staying in touch as best I can, with others in my life. It's been quiet, and I've had a lot of time to reflect on things in-between work, sleep, and all those other human requirements. The reason behind this is that in the last year, I have found myself increasingly worried about the future of zoo aviculture in the UK (Where I'm based), and not in the usual “not enough new bird keepers” way, but a deeper, indescribable feeling that I cant quite put into words. It feels in some strange way, that large scale, nationwide, progressive and cooperative aviculture is on its way out, there is an unusual sense among many (not only myself, this seems to echo in many conversations I have with other UK keepers) that career zoo aviculturists are a dying breed. Reductions in bird holdings and indeed complete eradication of the taxa in some UK institutions, although well intended through bird flu fears, has denied the zoo aviculturist their natural habitat and in turn denied many future keepers the chance to specialise in this diverse and demanding area.

In some ways it feels like the traditional model of a healthy mix of charismatic avian species and as Gerry would say “little brown jobs” in need of our attention has given way to a model where only the highest priority/popular species have any real hope of long term survival and often in only a small handful of collections whom have either the funds or dedication to work fully with these species, even then, not all are secure by any means.

 

Toucans - A challenge, but 100% worth the effort.

A small example group which are prime candidates in this case are the toucans. Toucans have it all, they are the archetype poster child for charismatic birds, yet in the UK, for as long as I can remember, they have struggled to maintain good populations, through a combination of poor husbandry and lack of awareness, indeed right now this is still the case. I could 100% say with confidence that 15 years ago the UK toucan populations in zoos were doomed. More birds died then of haemochromatosis and acute bacterial infections than were ever bred, and both of the UK collections that did manage to regularly breed them in helpful numbers have now either closed, or abandoned toucans altogether. The situation was dire then, and it continues to be dire now.

How then, I hear you ask, do at least a handful of these species remain on display across the UK? It seems such a prophecy has not come to pass? - Until you dig a little deeper... the beauty of our modern records systems allow us to see a huge amount of data at the touch of a button, and sadly in most cases it seems that the current populations that remain are not descended from the original birds bred 15 years back, those birds are gone, this is a second flush, a population composed of a mix of private acquisitions sourced from presumably mainland Europe, import confiscations and the like. Thus, 15 years from now the same will still be true, UK toucans were unsustainable then, and are unsustainable still, without a great amount of action in the coming years. Where that action comes from, who can say.

This tragedy seems even wilder when you consider that this is an S tier group of birds. These are a holy grail of high brow bird keeping, and whilst they lack the direct endangerment based conservation messaging we see with hornbill species, they are still fantastic in terms of engagement as not only a bird icon everyone knows, but also a flagship species for the areas they inhabit. Indeed if they were easier to keep, breed and house, I'd wager that they would have already secured a permanent, unquestionable seat at the zoo table alongside flamingos, penguins and the like.

Anyway, that's enough toucan talk, but there is a theme here. A couple of years back I wrote an article (will add link at end if I remember) that outlined my vision for the future of zoo bird keeping. I won't dive too deep as you can read it in full if you wish, but the crux was this: To improve engagement and move away from traditional stamp collections of birds, we need to switch it up a gear, create large, interactive walk-through aviaries with modern management facilities that can house and display a huge variety of species, also improving their welfare, whilst holding on to some traditional blocks of flights for the more fine tuned species that don't always play well with others, or need some privacy. This is no brand new vision, just an expansion of the traditional model that has loosely existed for a long time, with the reality of increasing costs and increasing need to improve welfare factored in. There is a financial reality to everything done in a zoo, and to those still out there building new, modern and exciting things for birds, I applaud you, it is no easy feat in this age.

Sadly, in the UK at least, there seems to have been several factors that continue to really blood suck bird keeping, and to be clear, I have no real strong feelings on these, but lay them out here as hard facts that shape our reality. These are firstly the ban of imports of wild birds, this on the whole is a good move, as the numbers of wild birds being stripped out of nature to sustain this trade were shocking. Many younger keepers will not be old enough to remember pre ban days, but I vividly remember visiting one importer as a kid, the air stank of what I now recognise as a mix of baytril and metacam, two drugs that back then were the cure for everything. Species brought in there were unimaginable, 4 species of toucan, handfuls of rollers, bee eaters and whole flocks of parrots. One thing that always stays in my head was a flock of easily over 100 red bellied macaws, fresh in from the wild available for £99 each! I can confidently say that all of those birds are dead now, in spite of being a long lived species in the right hands. It was a shameful time and looking back now, also a shameful waste of the birds that did make it here. Regardless of my opinion on it, the ban had a somewhat chilling effect on the diversity of species, genetic diversity and general numbers of birds seen in UK zoos, this also coupled up with a positive move toward phasing out privately purchasing birds. It is ironic that most of the charismatic zoo bird species that have survived up to now in the UK are descended at some point from these private stocks.

The second main obstacle in the last decade has been fear, fear of avian influenza. In the UK we adopted legislation to protect the farming industry fairly early on and still now that seems to be the main focus of avian influenza related activity. Though zoos now have more of a look in when it comes to this, there are still crippling limitations placed on birds in zoos that do not appear in other taxa with anywhere near the regularity we see in bird based situations. Things like closures, foot dips, extra biosecurity, all great measures in controlling a disease, but ironically these same measures are off putting to those with the investing power when it comes to development in zoos. The question is fair, why invest in a brand new state of the art aviary that may need to be closed half of the year when the same money could create a year round, hassle free experience for guests using another taxa. It's everything that bird keepers hate to hear, and I wish I could say that I haven't seen birds phased out of new projects for this very reason, but it is sadly an increasingly common attitude, even amongst those with historically strong avicultural backgrounds. Whilst by comparison, reptile and amphibian keeping seems to have come on leaps and bounds in the UK, bird keeping has in many ways stagnated horribly.

This brings us onto the third factor: decay. As mentioned earlier, there was a great growth in bird collections in the UK in the last century, mainly between the 1960s and 1990s, before the above factors really started to bite in. Ethics aside, this has left many zoos with ageing infrastructure and a few decades worth of depreciation and underinvestment when it comes to aviaries and facilities. Many of the most notable aviaries were built in this time, but are now in need of urgent repair or replacement to secure their future, and some zoos are just opting to not secure that future. The reduction of birds in UK zoos, sometimes given for various reasons, welfare, ethics etc... are often in truth tied directly to this reality, that the last couple of decades of uncertainty have really battered aviculture here in that sense. The more alarming aspect is also the closure of entire bird collections. One would like to think that in times of economic uncertainty these collections would refine, adapt, evolve. But in truth, what happens is that without love and vision from those with influence, they just die. The last 20 years has seen the evaporation of many once very well respected and seemingly immortal bird collections which contributed heavily to filling the gaps between the big zoo bird populations, whilst being able to also focus on more niche work that otherwise would not happen in bigger, more homogenised collections.

 

The entrance of Leeds Castle Aviary, a wonderful, but now lost collection that was one of the few UK zoos to regularly produce toucan chicks.

All this factored in with the lack of investment into the nuts and bolts of aviculture, the holding and support facilities, the kitchens, all that jazz, has in some areas created an odd desert, where a few aviaries exist in a zoo, but not enough to justify a full department, or the connected conservation efforts that would have come with that in the past. Indeed Curators and team leaders of birds, are an increasing rarity these days by comparison, which also has an impact on the ability of collections to focus development on avian projects and develop strong, dedicated avicultural teams.

It is not of course all hopeless, there are still a few very dedicated bird facilities and several big zoo departments who still bat heavily for birds of all types, but with the decreasing network of bird collections and by extension reduction in bird holding and investing capacity, these collections will have to continue to bear the weight of that torch alone for many years to come, and even to them, this may come at a cost to some of the species housed there.

So I've roughed out here why things seem to feel so flat at the moment, and in my usual way, now we need to discuss some of the ways this could be addressed. I'm going to focus more on keepers here as I've previously written on the wider idea of institutional improvement and I'd be hashing old ground.

I would say that as bird keepers in the UK, there is more of an obligation placed on us now to push, grow and dream than there has ever been. In an environment where there is a lack of real excitement, we must be the excitement, we must bring the ideas forth to push our taxa to the forefront where guests can enjoy them in all of the same beauty and glory that we do. We need to get them out there, to everybody, most importantly the people with control over investment in our facilities, invite them for coffee with your team, show them the birds, allow them to see what is often missed in the offices and boardrooms of the world.

On a serious note, we have to be open to evolution also, we cannot afford to sit back and make demands about what we need whilst offering nothing else in return. Wherever you can do so without welfare compromise, think about experiences you can develop and offer, aviaries that you could adapt to create some form of extra income from the space, find ways to help chip into the bills and make birds more viable and attractive, after all, as we know, we already have a fair few hurdles to start with! It is too often that keepers are able to say where money should be spent, but not offer any ideas about where it could come from.

 

A youngster engages directly with a zoo bird, this could be the moment that creates a new bird lover.

 

If you're lost for ideas, think about what you enjoy so much about your birds, could you offer that in some controlled way to a gaggle of birdwatchers willing to pay for that joy too?

It's also really important to mention that we also have a huge responsibility to grow, in an environment that increasingly offers less opportunity than before. I realise how unhelpful this sounds, but if the remaining career aviculturists in the UK do not put their best foot forward and start climbing the ladders and speaking for birds in the higher levels of zoo society in the future, who exactly can we expect to? How can we hope to justify creating new roles and spaces for birds when there is nobody speaking for them at the table? This is a mighty challenge, but not an insurmountable one.

It's true that the UK zoo aviculture community was much more vibrant and abundant 15 years ago, and that we have seen a slow burn decline of sorts, but I genuinely believe that another kind of scene is possible now that was not possible before. In that previous era, enrichment was a buzz word, training and welfare were things circuses did for amusement and animal rights folks talked about a lot, they were not documentable, learned skill sets that existed in many keepers as they do now. We may have a tougher lot in one respect, but my generation, and the one following it will be the best academically educated generations of aviculturists that have ever existed. We have to weaponise this for the benefit of our birds wherever we can, even if that means sometimes putting on the “showman” hat and finding new ways to help fund the aviaries of tomorrow.

 

A lorikeet aviary at the Indianapolis zoo - granted, the interior could be more complex, but this offers multiple choices to view, enter and presumably also feed the birds if guests wish.

Being utterly honest (which is a good or bad habit of mine, depending on who you ask) things seem difficult in the past few years, but there is a great future possible if we reach out and grasp it, but it will not come without dedication beyond that of average keeper work.

Here's a recap of things we can all work on;

• Grow – Climb the ladder, take on new and productive things, embrace the chaos it brings.

• Speak up – Be a voice not only for your own charges, but also the taxa as a whole.

• Get involved – wherever you can have a say on new ideas and projects, get in there and push birds to the forefront, but just remember to come equipped with some new productive and helpful ideas.

• Don't lean into the idea that closing aviaries long term and creating obstacles is always a good thing for the security of our birds, sometimes it can spell doom for an avairy if no sensible plan can be reached.

• Grants – there are grants out there for many things in the zooniverse, many go unclaimed because nobody puts forward ideas. If you have a vision but large funding seems unlikely, create a smaller proto-vision that is fundable through grant money and demonstrates a concept clearly, this will show your idea is sound in principle and help convince others it is seriously worth a shot. If not, you still have a cool feather for your cap and a boost on your CV.

• Dream big – we can't drum up all of our dreams with the magic money tree, but if a dream is only a copy of something that would be cutting edge in 1985, you're not really helping anybody. Make sure what you work towards is meaningful, contemporary and ideally a step forward in what it is you are doing.

• Stay motivated – let's not kid ourselves, being a keeper is tough, and at times can get you down and tired out. None of us make huge money, but what can serve as our motivation can be an internal drive to innovate... let your hopes and dreams for your birds carry you when your body is to tired to. Keep spinning those plates.

I think that's about all I have to say on this at the moment, granted it is bleak in places, but life is sometimes bleak, and I'd be doing a disservice if I tried to sell you otherwise. The takeaway here is that in the absence and decay of the structures that would support us on a bigger scale, the hope lies with keepers to course correct and steer the future back on track. We have more tools to do so now than ever before.

I'll leave you with a simple mantra that does not come from the animal world, but a world which in some ways echoes many of the tough realities of keeping, the world of fast paced kitchens and gourmet food - from the man who trained both Gordon Ramsay and Heston Blumenthal.

“We live in a world of refinement, not invention.” - Marco Pierre White

I hope that has been a thought provoking and artificial intelligence free experience for you, and if you have read this in full, thanks, I'm glad to be bringing you something of use. Below is the link for my previous, markedly more peppy article on the future of zoo aviculture if you are still hungry for more.

Till next time (whenever that is!?)

Stay Birdy,

C.

 

Heres the link to my 2018 article on improving the future of zoo aviculture:

The death of the living stamp collection - An immersive and higher welfare future for all birds.  

If you've made it this far and are still excited to learn more, you might be interested to know that we have set up a facebook group to help push forward thinking birdkeeping and discuss challenges and ideas. You can find it by searching Aviology: aviculture 2.0 on facebook or use the link HERE.

Night of the living... husbandry?! - Zombie practice in aviculture

 

It's been a while, and for regulars here, sorry, life has just been a handful of late.

I was thrilled this week to see a published paper beginning to assess the welfare benefits of circular aviaries, a great idea I've promoted for some time to anyone who will listen, and I'm excited to see what evolves from these works.

 

This week, the Aviology blog passed a major milestone (for a niche aviculture blog anyway!) by passing the 20,000 readers mark. It has taken a few years and the odd cage rattling (mind the pun), but in the main, reception to the blog has been wholly positive, with many new friends being made over the years having got in touch to discuss various topics. The idea that people would take time out of their day to read my work is humbling... Aviology:AI free since 2017 - here's to you and the future brave readers! 

On that note, to celebrate in some small way, I thought it worth putting together a post to talk briefly about Zombie practice, a theme I've touched on every so often but never described. That sounds a bit like folklore husbandry I hear you say, and to some extent that is true, but whilst there is some overlap, there is a critical difference between the two.

Folklore husbandry, a term becoming more popular as the years pass, refers to husbandry practices not rooted in scientific evidence when evidence is available. Snake oil remedies for cage birds is one prime example, many magical tonics are available commercially for a wide range of situations, but seldom do they contain any active ingredients or have any quantifiable veterinary effect. Using these is considered folklore husbandry because it is used on faith alone, with no data or case studies to back it up.

Zombie practice is usually what occurs as a result of folklore husbandry over time OR situations where systems are not updated over decades and their original creators no longer give input or context.

 

Gimme blooood!...

 

First let's chat about the first instance, which is usually seen more in private aviculture because in that situation there is less of a drive for formalised systems and actions are often more spontaneous, and I suppose, of less consequence to the wider world, but of significant consequence to the birds kept. Zombie practice occurs here when folklore husbandry is enstated, but then matched up unquantifiably with some level of success. Others, looking for success with their own species often emulate that practice in the hopes that they will have the same success, if they do, it is assumed to be down to the folklore, if they don't, they continue to cling superstitiously to the folklore in the hopes it will work eventually. Because many folks in private aviculture do not come from a science background, they often miss out on the critical thinking skills that would empower them to ditch the zombie practice and work on real success they can understand, and share with others. Let me be clear here, this is not an assumption about all private aviculturists, I am one myself, but there is a fair sized fringe that do work in this way, they will often refer to themselves as “old school” or similar, which doesn't really mean anything because there were superb private bird keepers in the past, as there are now (I've talked briefly about this somewhere, you will find a link at the end if you're interested).

What harm do these snake oil remedies and folklore practices do you might ask? Well, the scope is too wide to say for the birds, but in honestly, it does a whole lot of harm to the private keeper, it wastes their time, it wastes their money, it robs them of the true joy of success, if these resources are rerouted to meaningful welfare improvements that are observably improving the birds quality of life, the keeper too can thrive.

Secondly I'd like to touch on what some have considered the more insidious of the two, because it often manifests in an organised form and can last decades unchallenged. That is the instance of zombie practice in professional aviculture settings.

I myself have learnt via many mentors and backgrounds, but never myself subscribed to any “school” of thought, to me, the welfare of the bird in question is the “school” and I am both the student and the servant of that “school”. That's my view for what its worth, which will hopefully help you see my perspective.

One theme I have seen over a couple of decades in professional aviculture, at least in the UK, and every so often globally, are these “schools” or “lineages” of keepers, that route their training and discipline back to often one single source, many of those sources being now many decades old themselves, with the original minds and situations behind those practices now long gone and to some degree lacking in connection to modern aviculture. Although well intended, this kind of zombie practice has marched on through several generations of keepers, sometimes watered down each time it is passed on, and the original understanding, situation and any science behind it lost to time. In this sense this zombie practice comes not so much from folklore, but more a loss of definition and relevance over time, like an ever fading photocopy, losing parts of the original every time it is copied.

 

There's a theme to these images, but not really sure what, anyway...

 

The saddest part is that many of the original progenitors of these initial ideas were on the cutting edge at the time and today, would likely have changed their opinion and position in light of what we now know, just as we will find ourselves questioning our practice 10 years away. Yet it's still common to see 50 year old practice held up proudly as some sort of badge of honour, even when science now suggests otherwise. This is zombie practice in action.

A nice metaphor for Zombie practice in this setting is a headless cockroach, you can remove the head from the body and it may continue to live for a time, but it's usefulness becomes limited and it can certainly not be considered a cockroach any longer in the functional sense of the term. When honest critical thinking ceases, the cause is doomed. This is also true in many professional instances; when practice is taught as discipline without understanding, a timestamp is placed on the usefulness of that knowledge.

So, that's that; it might be that you have encountered this sort of situation in your work with birds, and its easy to want to buy into, to want to “belong” to something that will give you security, a group, a society, a particular school, but the truth is that great ideas and revelations come from everywhere, as do bad ideas and bad practice. Be fluid and free.

 

The key to selling snake oil (or mystery bird tonics) is usually confidence... the bad kind.

 

What can I do to resist falling prey to zombie practice I hear you cheer!

Thankfully that part is pretty simple, you just need to;

1. Commit to the idea that a majority of what we should know about birds in human care is currently unknown, speculative or unadressed, and that is OK and normal.

2. Know that your obligation to your birds is to reactively research when presented with a problem rather than delve into the security of how little written information is currently available.

3. Be clear in your objective, don't get caught up in aimless or purposeless pursuits. Write down the problem, then establish what you need to answer the question at hand and seek it, if you cannot find anything helpful within known literature, plan how you might obtain your answer practically via observation or data collection.

4. Strip back anything of no use to that cause. Do not yield to what you would like to be the case even if it has been repeated for many years.

5. Not give up, you might be on to something new and better (or not, but let's say you are).

And to be honest, that's about all I'd like to say about Zombie practice for now that I've not already touched on elsewhere and leave you with a quote from a great scientist and philosopher who whilst they were not talking specifically about our field, their thoughts when asked what two things they would say to the people of the future echo wonderfully with what I m trying to convey here.

“I should like to say two things, one intellectual and one moral.

The intellectual thing I should want to say to them is this: When you are studying any matter, or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out. Never let yourself be diverted either by what you wish to believe, or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed. But look only, and solely, at what are the facts. That is the intellectual thing that I should wish to say.

The moral thing I should wish to say to them is very simple: I should say, love is wise, hatred is foolish. In this world which is getting more and more closely interconnected, we have to learn to tolerate each other, we have to learn to put up with the fact that some people say things that we don’t like. We can only live together in that way — and if we are to live together and not die together, we must learn a kind of charity and a kind of tolerance, which is absolutely vital to the continuation of human life on this planet.”

~ Bertrand Russell

 

Till next time, stay birdy,

C.

 

If you would like to read another post along these lines, this is a good start...

Unexpected musings on the nature of excellence in Aviculture. 

and you are also interested in the quirky world of circular aviaries, here is an older post that is quite hard to access these days due to the way Blogger is set up.

MMM... DONUTS! - Thinking outside the boxes : Have we overlooked a major new aviary design?

If you've made it this far and are still excited to learn more, you might be interested to know that we have set up a facebook group to help push forward thinking birdkeeping and discuss challenges and ideas. You can find it by searching Aviology: aviculture 2.0 on facebook or use the link HERE.

Bird Keeper Green Flags - Good traits in aspiring professional bird keepers

My last post was pretty full on, and I highlighted some of the most problematic attitudes in bird keeping today. Many got in touch to share their thoughts on this and as a result, I thought it would be interesting to write a follow up article aimed at the younger up and coming bird keepers (or maybe some open minded current keepers), that rather than just sharing the negative traits one can develop, throw out some positive ones to look for and aspire to. So here goes...

Being a zoo bird keeper as a profession (and doing it well) is a demanding and sometimes unforgiving career and certainly not for the faint hearted. It requires a level of dedication and interest that would tax even the most enthusiastic of general keepers. The main reason for this is that birds are so fragile, unpredictable and ungiving in their habits that they could easily put off a novice keeper dipping their toes into the world of career aviculture. Couple this with the need for astute and informed, species specific observation skills and a nutritional grasp wider than most other taxa and this route becomes a pretty intimidating prospect.

 

As this post is more about us and less about birds, today I'll just include some cool species. All are connected to the article somehow, 10 points for Ravenclaw if you get it by the end.

 

Professional aviculture at least from my perspective is in a state of flux, a genuine push toward better welfare standards after decades of foot dragging is resulting in a conflicted environment, where often the costs of improving welfare to an acceptable modern standard can be sudden and overwhelming, leading to collections having to prioritise species or in some cases collection plan and reduce bird species so that better welfare can be provided to the remainder of the collection. Graduates either studying to move into industry or ready to work are usually well educated and versed in welfare and behaviour, and have the best intentions, but lack the historical understanding to see where aviculture has been and where it is heading. A level of resilience is required if a student of the avicultural arts is to survive long enough to learn how to function within the modern zoo ecosystem whilst still maintaining their sense of optimism and drive.

It's maybe not a surprise then, that in these challenging times there seem to be fewer young aviculturists stepping up to the plate, and those that do often change direction into different taxa or move out of professional bird keeping altogether. It is sad to say that in my experience more promising young bird keepers have moved away from aviculture than stayed the course.

Over the years I've interviewed, worked with and mentored many aspiring bird keepers and as such seen those that thrive and those that don't and so I thought it may be useful, particularly to students looking seriously towards a career in professional aviculture, to compile a list of my "green flags". These are outlooks, qualities and behaviours that generally indicate that a keeper will develop into a "good egg" (you older readers will know exactly what I mean here).

 

 

Disclaimer: These are just my own thoughts, and don't mean you will always get that job or placement you are aiming for, but they will help you understand what it takes to move forward in an upward direction.

 

Calm

First thing on the list is your demeanour. Being a calm, centred person is very helpful when working around birds day to day. Some bird species may seem very excitable and loud, but that does not mean that they require their keeper to be. For many smaller species if you are loud and boisterous you will at best spook them into avoiding you and at worst cause them to panic and seriously harm themselves. Learning how to remain calm and non reactive will go a long way towards helping you develop understanding with the birds you care for and enable you to observe them easier and recognise any developing issues earlier which they may otherwise mask. When I encounter someone who is not immediately excitable or distracted constantly it assures me that the birds are likely to be safer around them.

Observant

On that note, observation skills are critical in aviculture, more so than any other taxa. Birds get sick fairly often, have complex social needs and plenty of windows for chaos to develop quickly. It is true that birds "die all the time" but I would wager that many of these deaths are avoidable with a good understanding of species specific behaviour and a bit of proactive common sense and observation. There have been times in my early career when I've noted something, thought I'll "keep an eye on it" and found an unsalvagable case develop days later, and the kicker is that almost all situations are different, so being flexible and observant can help you make the right calls and communicate situations effectively to your colleagues each time. It's better to raise a concern that may be fine than overlook one for fear of sounding silly and it turn out fatal. When I encounter keepers who notice small and seemingly insignificant things about a bird it rings bells.

Willing (and able to learn (and research!))

This one is pretty specific. We often say we are willing to learn, but what I mean here is not only to say it and expect to be taught, but be able to self motivate yourself to learn independently and do the research needed to maintain your birds well, and keep doing it, forever. What is key here is not only to research what avicultural literature may be available but also to scour every source you can on the natural habitat, behaviour and needs of that species. Legacy aviculture has its merits and can still offer a lot so should not be ignored, but you should also remain aware that it is a minefield of folklore practice and welfare snake oil and some good people out there still promote very erroneous practice with great confidence. The truth is that whilst you may have mentors who are willing to guide you, the only real way to make productive moves forward is to develop yourself, by yourself, for yourself. Sounds harsh, and certainly not what many young keepers will want to hear, but nobody is coming to save you. You are going to build yourself into a solid keeper or fail. It's something I wish I'd learned way earlier in my career, so here it is, a gift to you in the hopes you make good use of it. If your friends and colleagues tell you otherwise, you need better friends and colleagues. Self motivated, alert and interested keepers are always a green flag, especially those who are aware of innovative and developing areas in modern aviculture.

 

Healthy

Simple really, nobody will say it because it seems a trifle unfair, but you need to stay healthy and aim for what is optimal for your body type. Nobody will judge you for not doing this, but if your physical and mental performance bottoms out because you are not taking proper care of yourself your team will notice when they have to draw up the slack. Drink enough water, eat properly, exercise, simple stuff but not always obvious to younger keepers and it's in your personal interests to be healthy too. If someone comes to an interview and has a healthy home life, enjoys walking, sports or similar, I can infer from that that they are likely disciplined enough to be staying fit and able to carry out their duties well at work.

Honest

This one is easy to say, not always easy to live by. Be honest about what you are doing, what you are seeing and what you are thinking, but try to present this in a diplomatic way wherever you can. Often in this line of work, the phrase “never attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by ignorance” is a reality. Birds are complex, there are thousands of species, all very different and no one of us can ever know all we should know about them, they keep their secrets well even with your best research. Speak up if you are concerned or have useful ideas and be honest about what you are doing and if there are problems make sure to carefully articulate where you may have misunderstood. Don't run to blame someone else, aim to resolve a situation and avoid it again in future with clear, calm communication. Young keepers who are honest about what they do or don't know fill me with confidence, over-hyping yourself in an attempt to impress could result in a colleague overburdening you with a task you are not ready for and this could come at the cost of the birds, an outcome nobody benefits from.

Self Aware

Self awareness is key to good development not only as a keeper but as a person. Knowing your weaknesses and your strengths will help you not only plan better but also assist you in recognising where you fall short. At first our ego thinks “how do I fall short?!” but the truth is that we all do, sometimes in big ways, sometimes in small ways, but it's in your interests to know where you have room to grow rather than crawling blindly (and maybe arrogantly) through life thinking you are already perfect and “enough”. Dedicate yourself to growing so that you can better serve your birds, they deserve it and so do you. Rookies who show clear self awareness, demonstrate a path of self guided growth and a maturity score high for me, these are the foundations of a solid reliable keeper in future.

 

Objective

This one is tough in practice, as no matter how objective we think we are we are often not. Emotion gets caught up in our work (and should, otherwise why are you here?) and we regularly have to make uncomfortable decisions or sit with situations we are not happy with. What is critical to a good keeper is firstly how they view it objectively and ask is this hurting my feelings or ego more than is sensible. Are my views on this causing welfare to be compromised, am I getting in the way of myself here? Euthanasia decisions in particular never feel “right” emotionally, even when you are 100% doing the right thing, and if they still feel wrong ten years down the line, you're doing well. Dulling your senses to important decisions like euthanasia is not only a bit cowardly, but will also impact your ability to make objective welfare decisions in future. Stay sharp, it's not easy or comfortable, but it's correct.

Unentitled

I'm not going to dive deep here, as this attitude is thankfully uncommon, but I'd be lying if I said I had not seen is a few times, particularly in new keepers and work experience.

The truth here is that in spite of what a college or university may have told you, or what you may have told yourself, no one zoo or institution owes you a free education, a free job, a free interview, cripes they don't even owe you a chance at a placement. You have to come ready to go and be willing to get your hands dirty and get tired, it's tough, but it's true. If you want to work with birds (or any taxa to be honest) having an entitled attitude is the quickest way to push away anyone who might have any interest in helping you. Remember, all the keepers you see were in your place once, they may have grown on well, or gone a bit wrong, but what unites them all is the graft it took to get there, nobody handed it out to them (in 99,9% of cases anyway, and you should not pin hopes on being that 0.1%!).

Resilient

Resilience is a bit of a gross word to me, as it's become a bit of a corporate buzzword used to normalise pushing staff beyond reasonable limits, but in this case, it is the right term I'm looking for.

What I'm getting at here is that you need to be able to get back up again when you get knocked down. Birds need you every day for their husbandry needs, so this part of our role is unavoidable. It's why we work weekends, Christmas, Birthdays etc... It's the path we choose, and biology cant change the needs of the birds to suit us.

It's going to be tough, and if you follow the bird keeping route, probably tougher than most keeper roles. You need to learn a huge volume and still be honestly happy with being “a fool” when it really comes down to it. You need to work your damned hardest to breed a species in need of conservation only to have a chick die days before fledging. You need to say goodbye to that bird you spent a year training when their health suddenly goes downhill. The next day you need to get up, get on and care for the other birds as if it never happened.

This is probably one of the toughest parts of not only bird keeping but keeping any animal. In my experience only exposure really builds genuine resilience in a keeper, going through those situations and learning ways to guide yourself through and maintain your core energy day in day out. Focussing on other tasks that can keep things moving forward whilst you process something is key, but like all things, it's likely you will in time, find your own ways to becoming more resilient, whist still maintaining your “fire” for the craft.

 

 

I'll leave it there for now, as that is a lot to take on board and think about if you think about it seriously, and although there are probably more green flags I could share, these core ones should help anyone who is feeling a bit lost and in need of a little encouragement.

My takeaway advice would be to write down these points as bullets and honestly ask yourself where you could improve on those areas. If you are strong in some areas, great, move on to working out how you become even stronger, better still maybe reach out and help others in your life that find this hard, they may too be searching for growth.

The biggest green flag of all is that you are here, you desire to develop enough to have found your way to this article, read through it and are now making a plan, or adding to an existing one. You would be amazed how many keepers are not that proactive when it comes to their career development. If you start off strong now and continue with a good mindset, think of where you could be 10 years from now.

I hope this has been of some help and best of luck out there, it's tough, but birds are awesome.

#staybirdy

C.

 

 

NEWS: If you've made it this far and are still excited to learn more, you might be interested to know that we have a facebook group to help push forward thinking birdkeeping and discuss challenges and ideas. You can find it by searching Aviology: aviculture 2.0 on facebook or use the link HERE.

I may see you there!

What comes first, the chicken, the egg, or you? - Thoughts on problematic approaches in bird keeping.

 

In the grand scheme of modern internet culture and wider life, things can get er... complicated.

I haven't really sat down to write over the summer, I've been busy working on myself with the sudden realisation that in a few more years I'll be ancient (in keeper/dog years!) and I don't want to be any more of a worn out old Birdman than I have to be. A lot has been on my mind both personally and professionally and I've had plenty of time to think about a whole load of things.

One thing that has been on my mind more than anything has been "why do we do this?" and more so all the unusual types of keeper I have encountered through the years that have confounded and baffled me.

In the past I have had so many conversations with all sorts of fellow bird keepers, both private and professional and so many seem to have encountered similar, yet it's rarely addressed anywhere in any meaningful way.

It occurred to me that maybe there's a whole load of keepers out there that could do with the comfort that they are not alone and there are (in my opinion of course) right ways and wrong ways to look at keeping.

Palm Cockatoos mating at Leeds Castle in England, UK - This will add up later, but who doesn't like the idea of more Palms in the world?

 

This post will be less of a husbandry critique and more of an analysis of the internal qualities and maybe a few of the "deadly sins" of caring for birds in general.

To be clear, this is aimed at nobody in particular, but a coagulation of decades of casual observation and moments that gave me, to use the modern parlance "The ick".

To start out, for those who have maybe been taught by or worked with me in the past, one of my often used mantras is relevant here - "Some people like being keepers more than they like keeping". 

What this means boiled down, is that some are motivated more by the idea of being a keeper rather than what it means to keep birds. In that sense I've been able to see the transition since the 90s from self focussed keepers attending authentic social meets to network with others to a more modern social media led culture where keepers are not only spending a huge amount of time on social media, but having to actively promote themselves like their own demented PR agent within their industry or circle, either for professional advancement or more nefariously just social clout. It's an unusual trend which is not going to go away, but it has led to a hundredfold increase in the sorts of "being a keeper" behaviours rather than "keeping" behaviours, if that makes any sort of sense at all.

Now being honest, this is fairly harmless in the main and seldom do any animals suffer from this sort of behaviour except in extreme circumstances (and I trust you will know those instances when you see them right?), but it does propagate a culture that leads the person on the street and young potential keepers with very skewed ideas of what it is to be a good bird keeper.

Anyway, that baseline set, let us crack on with a list of little red flags that always concern me when I see them, because you didn't ask for them, but you're here, so let's go.

1. Anthropomorphic projection

Oh boy, the cardinal sin, the Elephant bird in the room.

 

Anthropomorphism

/ˌanθrəpəˈmɔːfɪz(ə)m/

noun

noun: anthropomorphism

the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal, or object.

 

Any sensible keeper knows that their birds are birds and not people, but you would be amazed how often I see people wildly attributing human characteristics onto their birds, both at home or at work.

Sure, we spend a lot of time around our birds, but the focus of all of our interactions HAS to be based around their natural behaviour and not ours. As humans I find in absence of knowledge we tend to transpose what we do know onto a situation, which I suppose, often leads to this crime of ignorance and sometimes just indulgence.

One of the most offensive spectacles I witness regularly is keepers engaging in physical behaviour that is socially inappropriate for the species they keep on the basis that the bird enjoys it. A common example of this is when individuals have raised a bird for whatever reason and then insist on continuing to be its "parent" for the rest of its life - Yuck. If an individual was raised the natural way it's real parents would quickly push it to independence for it's own good so that it can socially function amongst it's fellow birds, and if it were to encounter it's parents again in later years, it would likely not behave like a perpetual chick, yet these sad dysfunctional animals continue to appear on social media and real life, being endlessly coddled by a human for the keeper's own one sided benefit - this doesn't help the bird at all.

 The second common issue I often see here is situations where people engage in courtship behaviours with birds, again often hand reared ones, which for similar reasons to "parenting" are misleading for the bird and will likely lead to more and more problematic behaviours. Once more this is a sin of ignorance, indulgence or both, and is a bloody horrid thing to do to your birds (which I know of course you don't do right?). Classic example here is parrots, the amount of times I see keepers touching birds in areas of the body that are considered socially as "mate areas", for context here there are a similar set of areas in humans, consider a stranger approaches you and puts their hand on your shoulder, that would instantly be recognised as a neutral, friendly interaction, but if for instance, they placed their hand on the lower part of your back, that is of course an instant sign of something else entirely. The same is true for birds, and by touching them in certain ways, we are sending certain messages and writing social cheques we have no ability or intention to cash. Generally speaking, in parrot culture, heads and feet are "friend zones", this is where flock mates would physically interact with the bird via preening, but under wings, under the tummy and vent, and in females in particular touching the back are all very much "time to get fruity" zones, and engaging any parrot in this way makes a suggestion that the bird will take literally, which if you consider the long term and constant physical and behavioural nature of parrot pair bonding, you are in absolutely no position to fulfil, nor should you. Kissing your bird anywhere, particularly on the beak, emulates pair co feeding or parental regurgitation feeding and is also wildly confusing and in many cases pretty stupid.

To add onto this, another non physical consideration is that birds communicate much of their intention vocally or via display, which means at times, you can be unintentionally sending mixed or erroneous signals to birds by participating or mimicking those behaviours. One fairly famous example that is often seen is a Shoebill stork "bowing" and that human visitors need to bow back. This is courtship behaviour, not the kind of human respect gesture we might expect. To that end, every visitor is not participating in some cute social custom, but merely entering a bird's territory, proposing pair courtship, and then leaving... endlessly. The same is often seen in birds like cockatoos where their flamboyant "dancing" is seen as an expression of musical joy, but again, this is often part of wider social displays that MEAN things to the bird that you can't necessarily detect. It is no coincidence that these flamboyant displays in so many species can often end in confusing and hormonal aggression towards the keeper or a bystander, because what is being sown here is just that, confusion.

 

A Summer Tanager interacts with it's reflections to no productive end. In a way we can think of misleading interactions with our own birds to be just as confusing and frustrating as this mirror.

 

Just to touch on the keeper aspect here (and this may trigger some folks so hold tight) there are two kinds of people when it comes to this, those who just don't know any better and are doing their best with what they know, and to them my suggestion would be to study up on the natural behaviours of your species so you can really learn how to understand your birds and their needs; this is truly the closest you can get to actually “speaking” to your charges, so much of their communication is non vocal, so its worth doing for you and your birds.

The second type do it because it they know better but it makes them feel good either to have another organism socially crippled and dependent on them OR because of the extra social attention it gleans for them to have a “relationship” with such a wonderful animal.

My brutal advice to them would be to get a grip, you are a grown ass human and know better than to cause unneeded confusion and social stress to your birds, they deserve as well adjusted a natural life as you can offer them no matter their background. Ask yourself honestly, is this for them? both of you? or just you?

And no matter what someone told you, or who else does it, you are responsible for your birds, the buck stops with you. You are the only one who can steer positive changes in their lives.

Don't get me wrong, I know that there are so many hand raised (intentionally or not) birds out there that have unique living situations and may be unable to live a life that we would consider normal for their species, but the keeper should never be adding to the already complex social burden these birds carry, we are there to help, not hinder and frustrate.

Outside of behavioural situations, anthropomorphism can creep into our husbandry routines, applying human preference and logic to an animal that may need or prefer something else entirely, or to counter may need you to be the tough guy and not allow them to live certain ways. I won't dwell here because in honesty it's a massive sub topic and if you'd like to read more along these lines I wrote a post earlier in the year on “dropping the chop” and how we can erroneously enforce our own preferences onto bird nutrition, so go check that out later if you like.

So all that said, lets close off on anthropomorphic projection, I think that the gist is there and you can see why understanding species behaviour is so important to know how to act right around birds, and indeed what a good keeper's place is in their bird's life. You're essentially a mix of bird butler, maid, nurse and agony aunt, and that's it. Oh the glamour.

2 – Social media

This one is simple – keepers often get really into generating virality to the point that they will obtain birds they cannot adequately care for, or manufacture fake situations to get attention from strangers online and or make extra cash. I have a few friends who keep birds and also have popular social media channels, but what they all have in common is that they are simply sharing things that their birds do, work they have done with their birds or helpful advice for other keepers. They keep birds first and broadcast socially second, not the other way around.

Some folks, in particular, more professional zoo circles tend to fall in love with the idea of being a bird keeper to the point that it almost becomes a cliché, with the image of the modern bird keeper being a khaki clad, key jangling, hosepipe coiling bag of joy, but miss all the underlaying qualities that define a truly great bird keeper, most of which require none of the above (although if you like khaki that much, you do you). 

 

Here's a Dollarbird, it has nothing to do with anything, I have just been thinking about them a lot lately, and now so can you, you're welcome.

In my experience a good fellow bird keeper cannot be easily defined by their appearance or even their initial conversations, to get a good feel for a keeper you need to see them amongst birds in a natural context. A real bird keeper can be easily judged by the fruits their birds bear rather than what they say, show or do on social media or in a conference hall.

Social media has it's place in life, but the answers to bird keeping are not there, they are out in the aviaries and the wild world.

 3 – Prioritising the wrong things

As a third and final bugbear, rubbish time management and blinkered process.

This applies to all keepers, probably more so to keepers who are working, but let's be honest, we all want to make the best of the time we have so that we can use it wisely and actually do the things we and our birds enjoy. Having good levels of discipline are critical to being a good keeper of any species and sometimes this can go so far that routines become so ingrained in our minds that we just continue them as we always have or cross transfer husbandry and practice to other species which may not require the same level of attention, or need different care.

One trait which seems common in all types of bird keeper is tidiness, sometimes to an alarming and almost pathological level, and being pragmatic, what is important to birds is good hygiene and avoidance of excessive pathogen pooling; not the shape of some topiary or the alignment of boxes in a hallway. Now of course when you have time for both, you can do both well, but I have known keepers who if given only 10 minutes to do one task of their choice would rather sweep the hallway or coil a hose perfectly than maintain some internal aspect that has a direct impact on their birds. Birds needs always have to come first, and performative human concepts like boxes being lined up have to come second. This root thought process is the issue, here not really the tasks themselves, but you get the idea.

 

Possibly the only documented time a bird has concerned itself personally with coiled hosepipes.

 

Once again we are often working with what we know and subconsciously lean away from the unknown and into the familiar, but that dovetails ultimately into the conclusion of this well intended brain dump.

WHY?

Why am I continuing these routines this way?

Why am I doing this specific task?

Why am I encouraging this behaviour?

Who is it benefiting?

Is it benefiting anyone?

What could I be doing that would work better?

If this process is actually unneeded, how could I spend this time enriching my birds life more?

Have I drank enough water today?

Jokes aside, in my experience the keys to moving forward are almost always being honest with yourself, being focussed on your birds, stepping to one side, remaining humble... and asking... WHY?

Stay Birdy.

C.

If you enjoyed this, I can write more along these lines, it seems like there are a lot of lost bird keepers out there looking for some guidance and a like minded voice but there seem to be very few outlets for this around that are direct and open about what good bird keeping entails for both birds and keeper. Let me know if this was useful to you.

We don't talk about flamingos: why do flamingos in human care remain such a challenge?

Amongst the most widely adored, popular and (curse me) marketable bird species on earth: Flamingos.

Looking at zoo collections alone, amongst the 6 species in this family they are likely one of the most widely kept and displayed birds across the globe, standing strong, representing the class Aves alongside other charismatic avifauna like penguins, ostrich and pelicans.

As we celebrate another International Flamingo Day, I'd like to share my thoughts on the world's favourite pink bird and explore some challenges of flamingo husbandry both academically and through my own experience.

 

This will make sense later, trust me.

For me, of all the birds managed in collections, it seems fascinating that flamingos find themselves in the conundrum they do. Looking at them from a zoo perspective, thinking more on the finance side of things, flamingos rank up as one of the most popular zoo animals and as such, you would expect them to draw the same levels of motivation and investment as any other species in this setting. There have always been challenges securing large amounts of investment for the "little brown jobs" as Gerry might say. You have to consider the obvious here: zoos are charities in the main, with limited income. This income is based on zoo attendance. Zoo attendance is based on what people want to see. What people want to see is what they see as charismatic, the typical zoo animals, you can probably name them. Now I'm not going to wade into the ethical swamp of doom that is the charismatic zoo species debate, but this has some relevance here.

What I can never grasp about flamingos is how they have all the right criteria to fare very well in a zoo setting. They are not small, they are not quiet, they are one of the brightest and most recognisable birds, they are great, they really are. Any other species, say tiger, giraffe or rhino, would have long been relieved of the simple day to day chronic health problems that we see in flamingos still. Somehow flamingos still struggle with age old issues that seem surrounded with a mix of hyper specific academia and at the other end, wild folklore husbandry bordering on witchcraft. What is it that creates this almost unique situation?

So first we must delve into the elephant in the room: pododermatitis or bumble foot.

This problem has been studied, talked about, ogled at more than any other topic in flamingo care, to the point that I have even heard it be asked in the past that delegates at a conference avoid the topic because it is so prevalent that it can become a distraction from almost all other aspects of flamingo care. It does still seem that this issue lays at the core of flamingos troubles in human care, and there is a wider web of limitations that connect to this that many may have not considered.

I'll rush you through what pododermatitis means for a flamingo, but we won't dwell too long, it's not pretty. pododermatitis is at it's most basic level a bucket of similar issues that crop up in the feet of an animal, but few animals are plagued quite as frequently as flamingos. In flamingos (and many other birds) it manifests initially as hyperkeratosis, usually on the soles of the feet, in particular the soft skin around the foot joints. Sometimes it will be only a thickening of the skin, much like human skin thickens when you walk around barefoot on rough ground. over time this can develop into quite obscene deeper tissue injuries as the hyperkeratosis impacts the use of the foot. There are a few categorical deviations used to describe the types of growths that occur, although the interactions and causes of these are still not clearly understood. luckily for the keeper, they can all be treated largely the same way based more on the severity of the issue rather than the type.

 

Example of fissures, presenting deep inflamed splits between the joints.

 

The categories roll roughly as follows, 

1. Hyperkeratosis - generalised thickening of the skin - very common.

2. Fissures - deep cracks occurring between the joints, usually resulting as an advanced form of the first hyperkeratosis state. 

3.Nodular - these occur almost as tumour like growths on one particular joint (below the foot). 

4. Papilliotomous growths - these are strange outward growing growths that form almost brush like hard skin tissue and are most often seen in advanced cases.

As I said before, in terms of management the severity is the dimension of concern, and this can escalate in a couple of ways.

1. Tissue infection - split inflamed tissue becomes infected, forming abscesses within the foot. this occurs most often in advanced stages or situations where hygiene is very poor.

2. Skeletal contact - some splits can become so severe that they can reach bone and cartilage within the foot, which has very serious implications for both welfare and recovery.

As you can see, this issue is quite broad in its occurrence and in my experience is best addressed from a husbandry direction as a SYMPTOM rather than a stand alone disease.

In almost every instance of pododermatitis I have encountered in both flamingos and other birds, the problem has, when viewed in an honest, wider scale, been a by product of an environmental or physical issue, or lack of a provision that bird needs. That said, it's now more clear what needs to be talked about way more when it comes to managing these birds - environment.

 

Lesser flamingos in Tanzania.

First before we delve into environmental factors, there is another topic we must touch on: pinioning and clipping. When we talk about this as keepers we have to be mature about it and avoid falling into the hysterical pitfalls that society may throw before us, but we must also resist the urge to ignore the by-products of this process as if it did not exist.

Again I'm not going to run foolishly into the ethical debate about flight restriction in human care, but I can assure you that I do think about it a lot.

My current view is this: Some collections have a no pinioning policy, some collections clip, some collections have a mix of pinioned and clipped, some have fully flighted under mesh. Whilst there are some major welfare benefits in terms of behaviour to not pinioning and clipping, including display, mating and mental well-being, three things come to mind when I think about this in relation to flamingos and their feet.

1.Flamingos are very long lived birds and collections with mixed flocks of both pinioned and clipped birds are going to house pinioned birds for decades to come. Even policy cannot remedy this immediately.

2. Flamingos are so popular that the chances of them never occurring in human care anywhere in the world are 0. This is not a species that is likely to be phased out on welfare grounds (nor should it with the right care).

3. The realistic idea that any aviary anywhere can offer a flighted flamingo the type of meaningful flight space to perform any level of athletic performance is naive.

So considering these factors we can reasonably assume (ethics aside) that very few, if any zoo housed flamingos will ever achieve the level of flight activity that they might in the wild, so you can pinion, clip, not clip and the physical result is largely similar. The reason this is significant is that in removing the option of flight, you are also removing a certain percentage of time that a flamingo can spend not putting weight on it's feet. Of course this can't be easily quantified because a baseline does not exist for a zoo animal like this. We could make use of wild data but it still would prove largely unhelpful because these flamingos are not wild, and are not in the wild, so what seems most sensible is focussing on what the tolerances are in collections, rather than trying to jump for a bar that is largely unreachable within the limitations of human care (at this point).

That considered we can reasonably infer that our flamingos are spending more time on their feet than they were designed for, lack of flight being the first offender.

 

Interestingly, young flamingos do not develop issues until they are several months old at least.

 

Secondly let us consider that flamingos are primarily a water bird. Their entire lives evolve around it and I personally believe that it is considerably more important to zoo based flamingos than many realise.

Wild Flamingos live quite a different life to those in the zoo, not only can they fly freely as discussed, but they also love to swim, and I'm talking properly swim, like a duck might. Their living relatives the Grebes are highly aquatic and in some cases almost exclusively bound to water. Why then do we not see flamingos in human care swimming like this? this would surely offer more much needed relief to our flamingos overburdened feet?... Correct padawan, you have it.

For some reason, probably historical, whenever anyone has built a flamingo pool they have in most cases insisted of creating something like a large circular children's paddling pool (more on historical cultural husbandry crimes later) and these types of pools are problematic for 2 reasons:

1. They are often too shallow for a flamingo to fully submerge and raise it's legs into a swimming position in the first place.

2. There is seldom any motivation for the birds to make use of their swimming behaviours. They will like most birds only do things for a reason, and even if they have that depth, they often need a reason to swim which seldom occurs in a zoo setting.

So to gently conclude that portion, we can I hope, without being able to crunch any juicy numbers, agree that the removal of meaningful flight and real physical swimming behaviour will significantly impact the percentage of time a flamingo spends on it's feet. We cannot resolve the pododermatitis issue entirely, but more conscientious management could provide a percentile of relief to our birds and make an intolerable situation more tolerable for them, but it does require this kind of proactive husbandry that can predict problems before they arise; an approach I have always been an advocate for - there is often method in my madness! 

Moving on to the second and by far more immediately addressable portion of this dive, I present to you the historical crimes and folklore that have cursed (almost) every flamingo enclosure I have ever encountered.

First in the dock - Concrete.

Concrete is by far one of the most convenient but simultaneously inappropriate materials to find in a zoo. Ignoring it's awful environmental profile, it is hard, thermally very unhelpful and in this case, very abrasive on soft flamingo feet.

The two main reasons bare concrete is problematic are firstly it's thermal properties - on a basic level it draws heat from the surfaces that touch it, that is why when you put your hand on it you will feel coldness, it is literally wicking heat away from your tissues. In a natural sense it behaves thermally more like rock, likewise heating up in excessive sun. Granted flamingos do have systems in place to deal with cold, they are able to regulate blood flow to maintain heat within their body, but just because they can do this doesn't mean we must expose them to it. These abilities are largely evolved to offer protection to the birds in cooler water, not cold surfaces and cold air.

The second and more direct problem unprotected concrete presents is it's roughness and the way in which a flamingos weight is distributed through the foot. Imagine if you will for a minute, spending a day in a swimming pool made of rough concrete, you would I'm sure by the end of the day have some soreness, particularly around the joints and tips of your toes. The same is true for flamingos, who's soft feet were evolved specifically for use mainly on flat, soft mud. It may at first seem a trifle anthropomorphic to make this jump, but if you accept that physics apply equally to all things and that the exact pressure points which often present with hyperkeratosis in flamingos are the leading walking points of the foot.

 

Pleasant eh?

 

How does concrete get even worse? Slopes.

One way to really accelerate the deterioration of your birds feet is to increase the angle of the concrete, which creates even more pressure on specific points. Again, Flamingos are designed in the main for flat habitats, an those big ol' floppy feet were not made for rough slopes. You would be amazed how often I still see bare concrete slopes in flamingo enclosures.

Second in the dock - Folklore and legacy enclosures

We need to be real, Flamingos are a highly specific and evolutionarily unique family, yet like so many birds they often do not receive the level of attention to husbandry that they deserve. This is, I believe, down to their incredible resilience. In spite of having their selective issues they are very sturdy birds in general, they live a long time, they don't tend to suffer huge amounts of pathogenic disease and are able to hide their discomfort for a long time. There is also a strange phenomenon I have noticed with flamingos in particular that I have never noticed in other species.

"The Elysian Flamingo Lawn"

If you think about the times you have seen or worked with flamingos in a zoo, there are likely a few instances where you have seen them pottering over a bright green lawn in an almost disneyesque fashion, something like Alice in wonderland. Seems harmless enough, but where did this come from and why does it exist?

Andean flamingos enjoying that sweet soft mud.

For every other animal in human care we consider deeply what type of habitat the species comes from and do our best to replicate that as much as reasonably possible. Aviculture has a particularly rich history here, creating densely planted aviaries for small passerines, open grass plains for ratites, more sparsely perched, high aviaries for our vultures, who require a more open plan. So HOW did our poor flamingos get lumped with paddling pools and verdant lawns?

The direct answer to this question is probably completely by accident, and that old villain of progress in aviculture, folklore husbandry. For some reason keepers seldom thought deeply about the real habitats of these birds and just copied what they had seen elsewhere, or made adjustments to a hand me down enclosure. There are also some subconscious cultural connections between flamingos and lawns, flamingos and beaches, flamingos and cocktail bars... you get the idea, all have little connection to living wild flamingos.

The reality for flamingos is MUD. Soft, preferably inert mud. If you seriously look at wild flamingos all across the world there are three things flamingos look for in their habitat; flatness, mud, water and combinations of both. In some cases these birds are living in very extreme habitats that are inhospitable to almost everything (again thanks to their resilience) but those three requirements stay largely the same.

Walking on mud both on the land and even more so in the water is very gentle on feet. It moves and yields to the pressure of those joints, it does not resist them like hard ground, concrete or rock.

 

Greater flamingo in Southern France.

 

I find a strange satisfaction in seeing muddy wet zoo flamingo habitats with large deep pools that are made up largely of these soft types of substrate. Sand also is great for relieving pressure, small particulate sand has been shown to be particularly helpful in this respect.

It should be mentioned that several collections have made considerable efforts to improve indoor housing for flamingos, making use of softer rubber liners to cover concrete, adding indoor pools and internal substrates, but these have by and large been in reactive response to the increased pressures added by shutting birds into the houses, rather than a routine effort to create overall more helpful spaces for the birds year round, which long term we need to design from the ground up.

To try and conclude on what is a very deep and entrenched topic, I'd like us to consider the network of challenges that human care has thrown at flamingos and see that many are avoidable. Consider our tough pink birds, missing in many cases their options to fly and properly swim, compound that with the Alice in wonderland worlds they sometimes have to inhabit that are doing nothing at all for the health of their already overused feet and you can maybe see on wide scale how this very common issue is a manifestation, a symptom of a wider issue that flamingo custodians could do better to remedy.

I'd like to give you with a few info bites that highlight how we often fall into accepting the state of husbandry as acceptable because it seems difficult to change.

- Flamingos are probably one of the most well studied birds living in zoos, pododermatitis in particular having been extensively documented, so the academic literature to tackle this is available and has been for some time.

- Studies of wild flamingos show an almost 0% incidence of pododermatitis - the wild is offering something we are currently not. On average around 90% of flamingos in human care suffer with some level of pododermatitis by comparison.

- The most Northerly population of flamingos exist in a feral state in Germany and fly out to the coast in winter once the chances of ice set in - Generally speaking flamingos avoid cold and ice when they can, and this can be seen in their natural distributions and migration patterns. I don't think cold is a sole cause, but have a hunch that it presents a significantly bigger issue than we currently think.

 

Are you sensing a theme here?

Takeaways from today -

- We need to recognise the attention these birds deserve and think harder about how flamingos live in the wild and try to mimic that.

- We need to have a high attention to detail when it comes to management, a small issue for us could be big for the birds and they can't easily tell us.

- Flamingos do not live on lawns outside of children's books.

- Pododermatits is a largely a symptom of environment and not a stand alone disease

- Question the science behind received husbandry - is this based in science and observation or is it just something someone else has done that has been neither net positive nor negative?

- Stepping away from these species and abandoning ship is not the answer: there can be a much better future for these birds across the board with effort.

I hope this has been helpful, insightful and has turned you all into flamingo husbandry detectives hell bent on improving the lot of these fantastic, lanky, pink wonders.

Till next time,

C.

 

P.S - for a bit of fun, have a look at this -  https://www.audubon.org/news/uh-what-flamingo-doing

And this  - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQAMiqyZDnw

NEWS: If you've made it this far and are still excited to learn more, you might be interested to know that we have recently set up a facebook group to help push forward thinking bird
keeping and discuss challenges and ideas. You can find it by searching Aviology: aviculture 2.0 on facebook, or using this link

I may see you there!