Call me naive if you want; I really thought that city officials would sit up and listen when presented with facts and science and public support.. Clearly, that has not happened yet.. No doubt, everyone has heard the news about Madrid and other cities that will follow in the wake of Seville; The massacre of these parrots could result in the blood shed of at least 20,000 innocent victims of the pet trade ( Us; you and I; are to blame) and badly planned government policies dating to when CITES took effect and was finally implemented in Spain; and the birds that were targeted due to false reports s well as the grossly exaggerated scares of diseases that were attached to that whole time period..There are so many factors that have led to the demise of birds worldwide and Argentine parrots are only blamed for the demise of sparrows in Spain, where everywhere else, in the world, Myiopsitta monachus are filmed and photographed ( documented) to live in complete conviviality with other species and even known to share their unique nests with multiple species; in a time where most birds who count on mature tree hollows have very little available real estate to call a home.. In fact sparrows have been disappearing all over Europe; in areas with no wild parrots to speak of and blame. I see an opportunity here where corruption sees a niche to make money through extermination contracts after building and developing a negative publicity campaign towards the plentiful, noisy parrots; which to the uninitiated and easily annoyed, xenophobic average Spaniard; seem like a noisy nuisance that threatens biodiversity, when in actuality what threatens their autochthonous birds is far from the blame that is being placed on these parrots. Can one truly claim to care so much about a native species (the sparrow); that is considered a pest in other parts of the world, btw, and yet do so very little to actually protect them and at the same time breathe brimstone and hellfire and call for the death of an introduced species? What kind of biologist, what kind of human being decides what lives and what dies? Nature should decide; the mess we are in is our fault; introducing species and playing god and removing them by killing them when we deem them unfit. or when we recognize that maybe that particular piece of the jigsaw doesn't fit in so well with our plans...I am ashamed to be a human being who considers the world a play area to mold and alter to preferences. What kind of person backs the eradication of a species and accepts what is said by government verbatim ;and repeats it as the gospel truth, regurgitating lies and giving life to the evil without doing proper research? What kind of person feels no guilt from giving their blessing to kill so many healthy living souls in such a barbaric and dismissive way.?.…It is time governments acknowledge and change the sad state of their neglected and poisoned urban streets and parks and that civilians accept and assume their responsibility in speaking out and questioning the lies that are fed to them....What a tragedy! What a despicable gross injustice; that these innocent birds have to pay with their lives !!!..The Spanish Inquisition was not for nothing…here we see shades of it still.! Why can we not act humanely? Spraying pesticides in parks; eradicating harmful practices such as cutting down limbs of mature trees that provide shelter and a way of life for all their fauna in the spring time, (when babies are hatching) .. may perhaps improving the situation for their native birds..There is no clean water available for their birds in urban settings and extermination companies advertise getting rid of "bird problems" ( including sparrows in their lists).. etc..etc..( the devil is in the details here). Such hypocrisy! Such propaganda! A little known fact is that sparrows feed their young almost exclusively, insect larvae and insects (protein).. and the sparrows that have been studied in Spain are under nourished and point to this crucial evidence; the lack of insects to nourish and sustain their young and thereby their future populations.. In fact; what is a world without insects? Stop with the hysteria about invasive species, and deal with invasive mankind first; there is so much more negative stemming from our activities; nature does tend to take care of itself..When will the Spanish governments accept responsibility for their policies, instead of putting the blame on the innocent victims of their atrocious policies of the past.. like when they banned Myiopsitta monachus ( the most common pet bird bought cheaply in pet shops) and announced that fines would be imposed for their possession..What do you think happened next? People set them free.. and here we are today..Inexcusable; irresponsible; dishonest and shameful; it is time for you to change, Spain!
I have included here a good example of a FALSE accusation made in certain articles, with reference to avian influenza in monk parakeets; that is STILL being cited by entities and biologists that support the cruel extinction of a species supposedly to save others; WITHOUT evidence; in fact; the tragedy here is that even without any actual data, A GOVERNMENT CAN extinguish the breath of 20,000 birds; if you do not see something wrong here, I urge you to reevaluate and ask for studies to back up this murder. Innocent lives count on our diligence; do not turn your head and assume that everyone in charge is doing the right thing.. this is very far from the truth... Be their voice; please! Say no to the bloodshed; say no to pockets being laced with cash that is tainted and stained with the blood of parrots; Speak up, PLEASE!
In 2008, the Mexican federal regulations on pet parrot ownership were changed, making it illegal to purchase native Mexican parrot species as pets [75]. With these restrictions, people wanting to purchase legal parrots as pets were restricted to nonnative species, such as the Monk Parakeet. However, in March 2014, the General Directorate of Animal Health, National Service for Agriculture and Food Health, Harmlessness and Quality (SENASICA), notified the World Organization for Animal Health that they had detected avian influenza in a shipment of live Monk Parakeets, imported into Mexico in February 2014
[76]. Despite extensive testing in Uruguay, no evidence for that particular strain of avian influenza was found, and CITES considers the report to be the result of a diagnostic error [76]. However, international importation of Monk Parakeets into Mexico ceased following the report, and no individuals were imported in 2015 (see below).
Like Europe, Mexico responded to concerns about the spread of avian influenza via international trade. Commercial importation of Monk Parakeets stopped in 2014 due to concerns about a potential avian influenza contamination in a shipment. Europe responded earlier to avian influenza concerns (partial restrictions beginning in 2004), while the import restrictions in Mexico are more recent (2015). Also, unlike Europe, Mexico did not implement a blanket ban on wild bird imports; the cessation in importation was a response to concerns about the Monk Parakeet specifically. However, as we detailed above, CITES considers this report of avian influenza in the Monk Parakeet shipment to be a diagnostic error [76], rather than indicative of an actual outbreak.
Á lvarez JA, Calvar M. CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Regional reports, Central and South America and the Caribbean[Internet]. 2015. Disponible https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/28/E-AC28-23-03.pdf
URUGUAY a.) CITES Activities 1. Common parakeet Myiopsitta monachus
In March 2014, the Mexican health authority, the General Directorate of Animal Health, National Service for Agriculture and Food Health, Harmlessness and Quality (SENASICA), notified the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) of the appearance of a new strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza of subtype H7N3, according to laboratory tests carried out on animal(s) that arrived on 13 February 2014, in a shipment of live specimens of Myiopsitta monachus. Although it is a type of avian influenza that does not affect human beings, it is a
mandatory reported disease. The communication to OIE did not specify the export country, instead referring to the origin as South America; nevertheless, Uruguay was, at this time, the only country that exported this species to Mexico.
The communication was presented as a manifestation of a subclinical infection, without clarifying the mortality rate. However, the prophylaxis measures used to fight the case led to the complete culling of 1987 birds. In addition, this alarming fact was communicated by the Mexican health authorities to the Animal Health Division of the Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries of Uruguay. In this respect, the Uruguayan authorities reported that the exported birds were subject
to official health monitoring and that to date no event had been diagnosed that indicated the health issues reported. As such, the results of the national monitoring and sampling programme for avian influenza for the last few years and the results of the negative tests of the birds that had been exported were provided in a timely manner. The Animal Health Division of Uruguay carried out the corresponding epidemiological investigation using samples from the establishment in which the parakeets were kept after capture from the wild and where they also raise and ranch birds destined for other markets. In addition, samples were taken from bird farms within a radius of 3 km without finding any clinical signs. The samples obtained by (swabs and serology) and from the animal cull were submitted to the official veterinary laboratory DILAVE (“Miguel C. Rubino”, Department of Veterinary Laboratories, Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries). After the performance of specific immunodiffusion tests using agar gel and ELISA, no positive antibody results were found for the
mentioned avian influenza virus.
Interestingly, I came across this article in NPR, which I think makes a good observation perhaps on the subject at hand.
. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104768337
In 1929, Parrot Fever Gripped The Country
Ms. LEPORE: It's a great story, but - and I think it's a great cautionary tale about how easily confounded the public is about messages that are sent both from the scientific community and the public health community and from the media, and a kind of tangle of mutual dependence that those two communities are involved in.
Scientists really need the media to promote scientific work so that scientists can get funding for their work, and their work is important. They should get funding for it. But the media doesn't really have enough expertise to evaluate the work of scientists, and what the media wants is a story that makes a good story. The parrot fever outbreak made a good story. The parrot fever jokes made good jokes. Neither of them actually bore much resemblance to the facts of the matter.