http://www.exoticfinches.com
Warning: All rights reserved. This article appeared in the issue of the National Finch and Softbill Society Bulletin. Volume 21. No. 3. May/June. 2004. (p. 8-10). Anyone wishing to reproduce this article for another bulletin, newsletter, article, journal, CD, or any other public forum needs express written consent of the NFSS and of the author michael@exoticfinches.com
by Michael Marcotrigiano, NFSS Science Editor
There is much talk on the internet about raising finches. Some of it has to do with the techniques that can be used to get difficult species to raise their young. These animal husbandry conversations are key to the survival of captive breeding populations in many species that are rare in aviculture. Some internet chat has to do with choosing the best crosses to make specific color combinations. Less of the talk has to do with breeding methodologies for improving the conformation, color depth, body size, feather quality, and head shape of existing lines. In some conversations, the quality of American and European lines is compared and it is this point that motivates me to write this article.
In the past few issues I, as Science Editor, have limited my discussions to reviews of articles written by scientists who publish in peer-reviewed science journals. In this article, I stray into the field of personal observations and try to clarify important issues for American bird owners. While I am trained as a plant breeder and developmental biologist, most of the methods and definitions apply to animals as well. There is some opinion in the following, but most of it is based on observation and conversations with breeders here and abroad. I’ll begin with some definitions.
“Propagating” is simply making more of something. For example, taking cuttings of a houseplant and rooting them to make more individuals is propagating. In birds, propagation could be putting ten Zebra finches in a flight cage and letting Mother Nature take its course, generation after generation, without selecting for any particular trait. For Zebra finches this is easy; for many others species it is not. Why? Zebra finches are “more domesticated”, either because they are inherently tolerant to captive conditions, or because they have been in captivity for so many generations that natural (or better yet unnatural) selection has favored those individuals that tolerate and breed freely in captivity. If birds won’t make babies in captivity, that tendency is soon weeded out of a population - assuming that the reluctance to breed in captivity is genetically controlled and the cause of failure. Once a wild species is easily bred in captivity, it can be considered domesticated.
“Domestication” is defined by dictionaries as “adapting an animal or plant to life in intimate association with and to the advantage of humans” and is necessarily linked to good animal husbandry.
“Breeding” has more than one acceptable definition. One is “the sexual activity of conceiving and bearing offspring”. To me, this is a just different way of saying “propagating”. Interestingly, if you look up the definition of propagating you get “to cause to continue or increase by sexual or asexual reproduction”, a definition strikingly similar to the first simplistic definition of breeding. Breeding also means, “the production of animals or plants by inbreeding or hybridization”. Please note that it does not say “interspecific hybridization”. Any cross between different lines in the same species is a form of hybridization. Within serious breeding circles, what breeding is - that propagation is not - is “the willful selection of parents and the use of genetic principles to reach a desired goal”.
In my opinion, there is not enough finch breeding going on in the U.S. There is much interest here in the products of European breeding efforts. I will talk in this paper about conditions in Europe that favor serious breeding and attempt to illustrate how these differ from conditions found here.
Europeans, because of their longer history of owning captive animals, have developed many more domestically bred forms than Americans. One look at the dog or the canary clearly proves this, with many breeds of each emanating from Europe. Why? One reason is that it takes time to develop new strains or breeds and the USA is a relatively young country. But another is cultural. While American maize breeders may rule in the world of field crop improvement, for most captive “pet” species there are few Americans dedicated enough to advance their lines to the next level, not to mention create new ones from scratch. Yet, we see many American finch lovers looking to buy “English Zebras” or “Euro Societies” because they like their appearance better than American birds. They are often larger, “softer”, possess better body lines, deeper colors, larger eyes, rounder heads, etc. In many cases the ignorance of breeding principles displayed by American finch owners leads to the degradation of years of European breeding accomplishments, instead of the gradual improvement - or at least maintenance - of already fabulous lines. The good European breeders understand that most of the conformation improvements come from “congregating” into one population the many genes needed to improve traits that are quantitatively rather than qualitatively inherited. I have watched some Americans chat about things like size, feather quality, head shape, etc. in the context of single gene inheritance. This simplistic approach to genetics underscores the difficulty that such bird owners will have trying to improve most traits in their birds.
How is a good breeder recognized? In Europe, some of the luck of winning first place at a show is removed by rules that do not exist in the USA. For example, in the UK, Society (i.e. Bengalese) finches must be shown as matched pairs in one show cage where they are both judged for uniform superiority. It would be difficult to win with “beginner’s luck” if you had to place two birds of excellent quality in one show cage. So, in order to continue winning it is necessary to learn how to produce many good birds. As Bob Rittman and Jim Warburton explained to me, in the Netherlands and most of Europe only current year birds are shown so that winning over and over again each year with the same bird is impossible. This drives the breeder to produce as good or better birds each year.
I am not proposing that the NFSS copy European style show rules to force Americans to become better breeders. Many American bird owners are happy just propagating birds and showing the best ones they come up with by random chance or minimal selection. That is their choice. But we should stop goggling over European birds if we do not have the willingness or patience to learn the good breeding practices (and I mean breeding, not propagating or husbandry) that lead to line improvement.
The stiff level of competition, the large number of events, and the proximity of the countries, all contribute to good breeding in Europe. According to Jim Warburton in England, he can acquire top quality birds anywhere in his country in only 24 hours. There are shows year round and travel and importation from adjacent countries is much easier than in the USA. Our large country can make it difficult to obtain the desired lines needed to improve an existing line. If a breeder does not ship, the distances one must travel can be discouraging. Shows are often so far apart they require the difficult mode of air travel.
Another difference in Europe is the higher percentage of breeders that like showing show-quality lines that took years to develop. For many species, there are lines that are “named” after the breeders and people brag about having, e.g., fawn Zebra finches derived from the “Harrison line”. This is rarely true in the US, and when it exists, it is more likely a phrase heard in guppy circles where lines exist that have their origins with early European emigrants to the US. In my bird room, I have Society finches from Bob Rittman’s importation of the great birds of Fred Panjer in Holland. Fred won Best in Show in the European World competition more than once for his Society finches. In Europe, Fred Panjer’s lines are well-known and highly sought after. In contrast, I won Best in Show at the US Nationals (all finches) with a descendant of Fred’s line last year. Yet, even with that win, I had no inquiries about the origin of my line and few requests for it. Perhaps Americans are fixated on obtaining a better individual bird, not a better line of birds, when they attain new stock.
Europeans seem fascinated with going beyond simple domestication to actually breeding for changes in appearance of the species - in addition to finding as many color mutations as possible. The English Budgie and Border Canary come to mind. In the US, I have heard arguments against mutation breeding, line breeding, or even domestication, because doing so will ruin the birds forever - making them unable to be released into the wild if they are needed to boost a sagging population. Yet, releasing captive raised species in the wild is a tricky and specialized science that historically is not achieved by government cooperation with pet owners. The more relevant reason to save rare or unusual finch species in captivity is that the importation and capture of most rare species is either difficult or non-existent. When a species disappears in captivity it may never return to captivity. So why not develop superior show lines of these birds too?
I will conclude by saying that I hope more American aviculturists take the time to learn the necessary breeding methodology and principles of inheritance to take a line of birds and bring it to the next level. Without such knowledge we will continue to see breeders resorting to strict inbreeding in an attempt to maintain type, or losing type altogether by “trying this” and “trying that”. Admittedly, there is luck in all breeding programs, but with strong knowledge of breeding principles, skill wins over luck and the good breeder wins more shows than the lucky breeder. In the end, a great breeder has a sense of pride in the accomplishments made and the patience it took to make them.
In the next issue of the Journal I will define some breeding terms and make recommendations for readings that can help a novice breeder gain more knowledge about breeding methodology. The end result could be a few less years to reach "Best in Show".