upatsix.com - Your Source For Pet Bird Information

Thinking about breeding eclectus any tips for a new beee?

Research, and make sure babies dont end up going from home to home!

Do your research.There are sites out there that can help you.

Landofvos.com

I hope this helps you.

First of all you have to realize that history of breeding Eclectus in captivity has only been around 15 years. Most of those were wild caught and there just isn't enough information out there. I've read all I've possibly come across and still there are holes.

I currently breed three of the four species and after ten years I'm still learning new things. The poster above mentioned Land of Vos which I don't currently recommend. But then again I don't breed Vosmaeri to begin with! I just think that site is biased, but then again that's my opinion.

The main thing to know is "Which Breed you are Breeding" and please try to breed 100% to 100% and know which is which. Use this handy guide:

Females-
1) Vosmaeri- has wide yellow band bottom of tail.
2) Grand Eclectus- has hint of yellow tip at tail, or refered to as a red-orange tail tipped with a thin edging of dusty yellow.
3) Red Sided- has a maroon tail with a 1" red band at the end.
4) Solomon Island- simular to red sided (above) but it is a lot shorter extending barely past the wing tips.

Also:
Solomon Island has bright blue rings around eyes and a definate seperation between the blue and red, as in lines of demarkation, Red Sided seems to blend right into each different color and the colors are not as bright. Solomon Island is the smallest of the four breeds. The Grands are the largest of the species.

Males:
No other species of parrot exhibits such striking differences or sexual dimorphism. Eclectus Males are primarily green as opposed to the females which show various shades of red and deep blue or violet. It is extremely hard to tell the differences between each species male. YOU MUST BUY from a repreteable breeder and make sure if your breeding that you have a pure species in one of the four. Look on the leg band and see if there is an "x", this means that they are hybrids and should not be breed. If there is a question do not breed, or if you do place an "x" band on them. One note of interest here is to look for odd red, orange or yellow feathers on males belly, this is a sign of dietary deficency or liver disease (their belly should be green.)

What keeps me from breeding eks? They really need care and a proper diet. The females are dominant and moody. The males are usually the more responsive pets. The babies are the most helpless of the parrot chicks. The first fruit that comes to mind is papaya (and other tropical fruit)...hardly something that would be in your back yard. If I did raise them, I would try to add a balanced diet for fruit eating birds, like mynah bird pellets (which I think helps my goffins cockatoos).

Probably no other combination of species or sub-species in the parrot family has gone under more trials and tribulations than the genus Eclectus. It is actually only one species (roratus) with approximately eight to ten subspecies or races.

Ornithologist’s since the mid 1700’s have been getting the entire genus wrong from the start. Heck it hasn’t been since the early 20th century that they figured that the females and the males were in the same species to begin with! What went wrong were two unique traits of this genus. First during the day (in the wild) all the males flock together and the females do likewise. It is only at night that they roost together. This is not the normal in the parrot world as a whole. Second is that they are the most sexually dimorphic of all the parrot species. In a world where male birds have the most striking colors and the females have somewhat duller colorization here come the Eclectus to rewrite all the rules. There is a third reason to which Dr. Marshall goes into below but I do not agree with that excuse to why (but make up your own mind.)

The common four I mentioned in a previous post are those that are generally available here in the United States as normal breeder/pet stock. What I tried to expound on is a “Rule of Thumb” not law. It was offered as a handy guide to tell the difference between them. It is in no way considered “authentic” or “scientific” but rather a way that I used to tell the different breeds apart in my aviary. I too breed three different sub-species of Eclectus and by my choice do not breed Vosmaeri. This is not in any way reflective of the breed in any way good or bad.

The best source that I found on the net to tell the difference between all of the different sub-species is Dr. Robert Marshall from Australia (where better than from where they originate?) http://www.birdhealth.com.au/bird/eclec ... tures.html

I am a retired US Marine and was fortunate to have visited a few islands that had as their native flocks Eclectus. Since the early and mid 80’s I have studied many articles, books, papers, thesis, and web sites devoted to the Eclectus. When I made a previous comment about a certain web site being biased, that was intended to be a personal observation against the whole subject matter at hand. Not an indictment against the young lady who operates it.

When I review subject matter for research I look for certain things that in my opinion lacked on her site. First of all I noticed that all of her articles are written by her and only her. In my judgment I like to see contributing authors with similar views or data to support conclusions brought forward as her conclusions. Secondly I have yet to see any citations, credits, footnotes, or other statements which lead her to these conclusions by other authors or scientific creditability (such as the one provided above by Dr. Marshall.)

Now I am not at all adverse to someone putting forth their views and opinions on the web. This is in fact one of the cornerstones of this magnificent super highway. However I am considered to be a man of Scholar (BA, Univ. of California-Berkeley) and take making a recommendation on reading material a high trust. So for the two obvious reasons mentioned above I considered that web site to be biased in nature and would instead offer a good Barron’s publication “Eclectus Parrots” authored by Katy McElroy. If I may add here she does cite Land of Vos as a web site in her publication. But after a good read (of her entire book) one could ascertain fact from fiction.

Again I wish that there were more publications by credentialed authors that I could recommend (PHD, DVM, etc..) but here is where the subject is lacking. As time goes on those of us who follow aviculture closely will demand more.

As for you Mr. d-pachios your comments do not even rise to be insulting. I’ve seen what you have written too and about me on other postings and discussion topics. Your rudimentary flaming attempts lack several things, but namely common sense. Hint here in the future if you have an opposing view by all means post. But at least cite your expert knowledge; for how are we all to understand where you came up with your information? by osmosis?

To say I should do more reading on the subject is to know me completely and how I might add, did you come to this conclusion? Are you my new best friend?

All I can tell about you is that you’re rude. Your prior postings have no creditability and show a tremendous lack of understanding for the subject matter presented. In fact I might suggest that before you comment “against someone” read the entire posting and instead of trying to flame that person (without a match or spark) bring forward some facts (supported by evidence) and frame your comments. And most important try your best to understand what you are writing about first.

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.-- Mark Twain

WOW!! cant we all get along

Not to worry June. This sort of thing has a way of rearing its ugly head on many subjects online and has been doing so since the early days of Compu-Serve. Then go ahead and mix in the hot topic of Eclectus Parrots and a perfect storm is brewed.

When I answered this topic post originally, it was mainly to describe the many sub-species of Eclectus that are out there and issue a warning to the many hybrid combinations that breeders are offering now. It is not only tips on techniques that we employ as breeders to procreate the species but we should as good citizen aviculturists warn to potential breeders pitfalls that are out there. To me the biggest one of all is the dilution of the pure lines or races more so in this species than any of the others that I have witnessed.

When these birds were first categorized and recorded for prosperity true lines existed. In our haste to enter into the breeder world the lines have crossed beyond delineation. With the male of this species being so close in coloration, body type, mass, and other characteristics it is only by witnessing “first hand” their offspring can we be certain of their species. If anyone wants to breed this species these subjects must be dealt with no matter whose feelings get hurt. Knowledge is the key here.

Once again, but now from the Journal:

Grand Eclectus: Discovered and categorized by the Muller Expedition in 1776 documents their length as 35 cm and weight 380-475grms.

Solomon Island Eclectus: Discovered and categorized by the Famous Rothchild and Hartert Expedition in 1901 documents their length as 33 cm and weight of 380-425grms. In every professional scientific account that I have read categorizes the S.I. as the smallest of the species.

The defacto largest in the genus is “The Max” but they are found in so little numbers and are on the verge of extinction, mention of their existence would be purely speculative. Besides the topic here, was to breed them and if a breeding pair were found I would venture to say that a highly skilled and trained team of PHD Ornithologists would be more than willing to provide all the care free of charge.

Back to my rule of thumb issue, when I listed four of the common sub-species that are currently available I made particular mention of the “tail lengths” in describing certain quick references to their genus. Not “their overall lengths” as some people who quickly read this reference guide and did not notice, and ran off willy-nilly to make rude comments when in fact their own mind betrayed them. Hence my reference to reading and understanding what they were commenting on.

That table is perfect to the colorization and lengths consistent to each sub-species. The S.I.’s tail is shorter and it only extends “just past their wingtips” when in a folded back position. The others are longer, with the longest tail belonging to the Grand sub-species.

There is no medical accounting for this phenomena but the facts are the S.I.’s tail feathers are not as strong as the other sub-species and even though she has the shortest tail of all, it is found on many (percentage based) that they are easy to break off. So not only does she have this tail problem but her flight is restricted as a result.

I hope this clears up any misconceptions that people are having when reading down this post. It appears that we have drawn over 420 views on this topic and hope many came away with some information that will be useful. I can properly cite (Little Brown Book) any data or statement made in not only this post but for any of my postings here on Up at Six. E-mail is accepted.

Dutch

P.S.- What I wanted to know more about was this "Grand Quote" that I read about in a previous post. I asked for a citation on that because it was one I had never heard. Is this another slice of fiction or are we going to become priviledged to a 1700's diary entry of the Muller Expedition where someone says "Isn't that Grand." I truly enjoy first hand accounts and found that to be terrific. Again I ask for a citation?

First of all by "Cutting, Coping, and Pasting" shows nothing but your mentality (what we learned in first grade.) It not only demeans the reader but also yourself. Showing a link is considered sufficiant to cite an article, by cutting coping and pasting "without showing the published site, author, etc" is plagiarism if not illegal. Surely you jest this is your work?

And where is the material you quoted about "Isn't this Grand," as a member of the Muller Expedition said when they named the Grand?

Please try to stay on topic here.

Refer to the Little Brown Book to properly cite your referenced material this way you stand a good chance of not being sued or jailed.

[quote="d-pachios"]As long as you cut /copy/ paste .. and item from the internet that is not
" copyright " and it is not being used for profit purposes you may use the information at will.

All websites have the ability for the owner to lock there material including
pictures so that they can not be < cut/copy/pasted.....

With all your education and with your knowledge of the "Law"
I though you would have know that ....
[quote]

Freedom of Expression

In a free and open society, such as ours, it is one of our main tenements, to be able to express ourselves; by writing, pictures, music, and other forms of communication, within and out of this country. How are we ever to be the beacon of light and freedom to the world if our capacity to communicate is stifled?

And now (or lately) add this great communication device in the World Wide Web and other internet modes. We literally have the capacity to engage millions of people with the click of a mouse. But rules of writing have not changed for decades. Even prior to the WWW we have established certain basic rules for writing citations; based on MLA Format 5th Ed., ASA with all current attributes, AWLD, and many other generally acceptable and accredited institutes of higher learning. But they all stress giving each author credit for their work in order to keep yourself from plagiary.

Your novel approach (or defense) in the fact that one has the ability to cut copy and paste other peoples work and that function has not been deactivated so therefore; you can use that material and show it as your own, is a laughable one and I don’t think it would hold water in a court of law.

From the United States Justice Department Website (link below)
[quote]The law of copyright is designed to foster the production of creative works and the free flow of ideas by providing legal protection for creative expression. Copyright provides protection against the infringement of certain exclusive rights in "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression," including computer software; literary, musical, and dramatic works; motion pictures and sound recordings; and pictorial, sculptural, and architectural works. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(a). These exclusive rights include the rights of reproduction, public distribution, public performance, public display, and preparation of derivative works. 17 U.S.C. § 106.

Legal protection exists as soon as the work is expressed in tangible form. Copyright law protects the physical expression of an idea, but not the idea itself.

Although civil law protects all the copyright owner's exclusive rights, criminal law primarily focuses on the rights of distribution and reproduction. See 17 U.S.C. § 506(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2319. Those convicted of criminal copyright infringement face up to five years' imprisonment and a $250,000 fine. Id. [quote] USDoJ I.B.1. Copyright Law.

http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrim ... 1ipma.html

It is important to note in the paragraph above, that such legal protection exists upon expression in tangible form. Such tangible form has been indicated through the courts by “Stare Deices” to include any and all internet communications for or without profit. Not only can the plagiarist be liable in this but also the publisher (those who own the web site.)

What we all need to know about cut, copy, and paste authorship is that the idea is safe for commenting upon, just not the exact words of the author- that is considered protected. You can even use those exact words but a clear delineation or difference must be made in that person’s work and that of “your” commentary. Proper citations, quotations, bookmarks, reference marks, and the like will allow for this free and open commentary in our society without crossing these boundaries. In fact up at six has a built in “quote” for authorship when making these key remarks. Please use them and if you need any further example look above.

Also here is handy reference site for:

http://www.utdallas.edu/dept/gs/interns ... ences.html ASA format citations


This is a remarkable site for writers authored by no other than:

http://web.mit.edu/mbarker/www/writers/t026132.txt Mark Twain- "Rules of Writing" M.I.T

This Purple Heart guy, How many Eclectus have you raised in the last 10 years? I have never seen a post in "For Sale". Just alot of "I know more than you post." Poor fellow..... just needs to make himself feel good by putting down others.

Perhaps Purple Heart doesn't post in For Sale because his babies are pre-sold to customers. I know I don't post all my babies on upatsix either yet I've been breeding for 20 years. Personally, I have found several of his posts highly informative which is what this forum is all about.

Sally

lilla wrote:Perhaps Purple Heart doesn't post in For Sale because his babies are pre-sold to customers. I know I don't post all my babies on upatsix either yet I've been breeding for 20 years. Personally, I have found several of his posts highly informative which is what this forum is all about.

Sally

Why Thank you Sally!

That was the nicest thing anybody has said about me here. And you are correct. I do have waiting lists for my babies and all are sold. I prefer to meet everyone of my babies future companions and do not ship unless they are adult birds (last year I did ship a Pair of SI Eclectus to Long Island.) Really the only time I use this forum to sell is when I need to cull my flock. I guess the next time I should send a personal note to her when I cull?

I come from a family of breeders (over 300 years) and have raised birds all my life. In fact my play pen was my grandfathers pigeon coop and I ate seeds like candy (my uncles called me bird seed as a nic-name.) Like I said in the previous post (some people can't read back that far in order to bad mouth somebody) I became interested in the Eclectus over 20 years ago when I saw them in the wild, while I was in the Marine Corps. I had the chance to re-visit the area again and when I returned to the states purchased my first breeding pair. Since then I have raised several hundred Eclectus babies and consider this species one of my specialities.

I have not bad mouthed anybody (look back on all my posts) and only requested a proper "quote" of the remark referenced in one of the first posts because I do enjoy the history in the species. I have spent a great deal of time in the last 20 years researching Eclectus and asked a simple question to clear up a simple statement.

Furthermore, the subject of my post was to be very point blank when it comes to breeding Eclectus. To state for the record, and many have asked me to inspect pairs to acertain the pure breed in a possible Eclectus purchase, to say "Please be careful" when buying and breeding Eclectus.

There is far too many hybird combinations out there. In fact I have yet to find more than a handfull of "pure species" when asked to do so in local bird marts and expo shows. This is a plain fact to which careless breeding has made our stock into.