Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Understanding the motivations for keeping wild birds in the semi-arid region of Brazil

Authors: Wallisson Sylas Luna de Oliveira, Sérgio de Faria Lopes, Rômulo Romeu Nóbrega Alves

Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Birds are kept as pets around the world, and bird-keeping is an ancient and widespread practice, constituting one of the main reasons for the decline of some species. In the semi-arid region of Brazil, this practice is very common and continues despite being designated as illegal in recent decades.
This study aimed to identify the species and families of songbirds used as pets in the semi-arid region of Brazil, characterize the maintenance of the exploited species in captivity, and evaluate the sociocultural context associated with this practice.

Methods

Data were collected from a total of 62 wild bird-keepers in the study area through interviews using semi-structured forms and informal conversations.

Results

A total of 34 bird species are bred as pets in the study area. Thraupidae was the most represented family in this study followed by Icteridae, and together, these families accounted for 61.7% of the local specimens. As reported by the respondents, birds are acquired by capturing them in rural areas or through local and regional markets. The number of species identified by the respondents did not differ according to respondent income, educational level, or age (p > 0.05). Maintaining these birds in cages includes some care, such as providing feed, medicine, and in some cases, training to improve their song or to learn songs from other species. The species with the highest use values (UVs) were Sporophila albogularis (UV = 0.83), Paroaria dominicana (0.82), and Sporophila nigricollis (0.79), indicating their importance as wild animal pets.

Conclusion

The birds reported in this study have strong cultural importance and high economic value for the people involved in bird-keeping. In this sense, ethnoornithological studies are fundamentally important since they can provide basic information to inform plans and actions to promote the conservation and sustainable management of local avifauna, including the essential element of environmental education strategies.
Literature
1.
Alves RRN, Leite RC, Souto WMS, Bezerra DMM, Loures-Ribeiro A. Ethno-ornithology and conservation of wild birds in the semi-arid Caatinga of northeastern Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9:14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Harris JBC, Tingley MW, Hua F, Yong DL, Adeney JM, Lee TM, Marthy W, Prawiradilaga DM, Sekercioglu CH, Winarni N. Measuring the impact of the pet trade on indonesian birds. Conserv Biol. 2017;31(2):394–05.
3.
Jepson P, Ladle RJ. Governing bird-keeping in Java and Bali: evidence from a household survey. Oryx. 2009;43:364–74.CrossRef
4.
Roldán-Clarà B, Lopez-Medellín X, Espejel I, Arellano E. Literature review of the use of birds as pets in Latin-America, with a detailed perspective on Mexico. Ethnobiol Conserv. 2014;3:1–18.
5.
Su S, Cassey P, Vall-Llosera M, Blackburn TM. Going cheap: determinants of bird price in the Taiwanese pet market. PLoS One. 2015;10:1–17.
6.
Burivalova Z, Lee TM, Hua F, Lee JS, Prawiradilaga DM, Wilcove DS. Understanding consumer preferences and demography in order to reduce the domestic trade in wild-caught birds. Biol Conserv. 2017;209:423–31.CrossRef
7.
Drews C. Wild animals and other pets kept in Costa Rican households: incidence, species and numbers. Soc Anim. 2001;9:107–26.CrossRef
8.
Thomsen JB, Edwards SR, Mulliken TA. Perceptions, conservation, and management of wild birds in trade.  TRAFFIC International, WWF and IUCN, Cambridge; 1992.
9.
Tidemann S, Gosler A. Ethno-ornithology: birds, indigenous people, culture and society. London/Washington: Earthscan/James & James; 2010.
10.
Alves RRN, Nogueira EE, Araujo HFP, Brooks SE. Bird-keeping in the Caatinga, NE Brazil. Hum Ecol. 2010;38:147–56.CrossRef
11.
Tully TN Jr. Chapter 10—birds. In: Manual of exotic pet practice. Saint Louis: W.B. Saunders; 2009. p. 250–98.CrossRef
12.
Marini MA, Garcia FI. Bird conservation in Brazil. Conserv Biol. 2005;19:665–71. 13CrossRef
13.
14.
Moura ACDA. Primate group size and abundance in the Caatinga dry forest, Northeastern Brazil. Int J Primatol. 2007;28:1279–97.CrossRef
15.
16.
Olmos F, Silva WAG, Albano CG. Aves em oito áreas de Caatinga no sul do Ceará e oeste de Pernambuco, Nordeste do Brasil: composição, riqueza e similaridade. Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia (São Paulo). 2005;45:179–99.
17.
Alves MM, Lopes SF, Alves RRN. Wild vertebrates kept as pets in the semiarid region of Brazil. Trop Conserv Sci. 2016;9:354–68.CrossRef
18.
Fernandes-Ferreira H, Mendonça S, Albano C, Ferreira F, Alves RRN. Comércio e criação de aves silvestres (Psittaciformes, Piciformes e Passeriformes) no Estado do Ceará. A Etnozoologia no Brasil: Importância, Status atual e Perspectivas. 2010;4:379–402.
19.
Paixão RMC, Silvestre LC, Pessoa TSA, Sousa AEBA. Entre saberes e observações: a manutenção em cativeiro de Passeriformes silvestres em uma comunidade da Zona da Mata Paraibana. Atualidades Ornitológicas On-line. 2013;174:54–9.
20.
Alves RRN. Relationships between fauna and people and the role of ethnozoology in animal conservation. Ethnobiol Conserv. 2012;1:1–69.
21.
Mallet-Rodrigues F, Parrini R, Pacheco JF. Birds of the Serra dos Órgãos, state of Rio de Janeiro, southeastern Brazil: a review. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia. 2007;15:05–35.
22.
Ribeiro LB, Silva MG. O comércio ilegal põe em risco a diversidade das aves no Brasil. Ciência e Cultura. 2007;59:4–5.
23.
Gama TP, Sassi R. Aspectos do comércio ilegal de pássaros silvestres na cidade de João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brasil. Gaia Scientia. 2008;2.
24.
25.
Pizo M. A conservação das aves frugívoras. Ornitologia e conservação: da ciência às estratégias. Tubarão: Ed Unisul; 2001. p. 49–59.
26.
Robinson JG, Redford KH: Neotropical wildlife use and conservation. 1991.
27.
Sick H. Birds in Brazil. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press; 1993.
28.
Sick H. Ornitologia Brasileira, edição revista e ampliada por José Fernando Pacheco. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira; 1997.
29.
Sick H, Teixeira D. Notas sobre aves brasileiras raras ou ameaçadas de extinção. Publi Avuls Mus Nac. 1983;1079.
30.
Silva EM, Oliveira ELR, Lima VFS, Borges JCG, Porto WJN. Aves silvestres comercializadas ilegalmente em feiras livres da cidade de Arapiraca, Alagoas. Enciclopédia Biosfera. 2015;11:2045.
31.
Gogliath M, Bisaggio EL, Ribeiro LB, Resgalla AE, Borges RC. Avifauna apreendida e entregue voluntariamente ao Centro de Triagem de Animais Silvestres (CETAS) do IBAMA de Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais. Leonardo. 2010;1:3.
32.
Licariao MR, Bezerra DMM, Alves RRN. Wild birds as pets in Campina Grande, Paraíba State, Brazil: an ethnozoological approach. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2013;85:201–13.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Rocha MSP, Cavalcanti PCM, Sousa RL, Alves RRN. Aspectos da comercialização ilegal de aves nas feiras livres de Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brasil. Revista de Biologia e Ciências da Terra. 2006;6:204–21.
34.
35.
36.
Brasil: CPRM - Serviço Geológico do Brasil. Projeto cadastro de fontes de abastecimento por água subterrânea. Diagnóstico do município de Lagoa Seca, estado da Paraíba. Organizado [por] João de Castro Mascarenhas, Breno Augusto Beltrão, Luiz Carlos de Souza Junior, Franklin de Morais, Vanildo Almeida Mendes, Jorge Luiz Fortunato de Miranda. Recife: CPRM/PRODEEM; 2005. p. 10.
37.
Alburquerque UP, Lucena RP, Cunha LC. Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobiológica y etnoecológica. Recife: Ed I NUPPEA; 2010. p. 39–64.
38.
Huntington HP. Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: methods and applications. Ecol Appl. 2000;10:1270–4.CrossRef
39.
Bailey K. Methods of social reached. 2nd ed. New York: The Free Press; 1982. p. 553.
40.
Stebbins RA. Fitting in: the researcher as learner and participant. Qual Quant. 1987;21:103–8.CrossRef
41.
Alexiades MN, Sheldon JW. Selected guidelines for ethnobotanical research: a field manual. New York: New York Botanical Garden; 1996.
42.
Bezerra DMM, Araujo HFP, Alves RRN. Captura de aves silvestres no semiárido brasileiro: técnicas cinegéticas e implicações para conservação. Trop Conserv Sci. 2012;5:50–66.CrossRef
43.
Piacentini VQ, Aleixo A, Agne CE, Maurício GN, Pacheco JF, Bravo GA, Brito GR, Naka LN, Olmos F, Posso S. Annotated checklist of the birds of Brazil by the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee/Lista comentada das aves do Brasil pelo Comitê Brasileiro de Registros Ornitológicos. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia-Braz J Ornithol. 2015;23:90–298.
44.
IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).The IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2017-1. 2017. Retrieved from www.​iucnredlist.​org. Accessed 5 July 2017.
45.
Phillips O, Gentry AH, Reynel C, Wilkin P, Galvez-Durand B. Quantitative ethnobotany and Amazonian conservation. Conserv Biol. 1994;8:225–48.CrossRef
46.
Rossato SC, De LeitãO-Filho HF, Begossi A. Ethnobotany of caiçaras of the Atlantic Forest coast (Brazil). Econ Bot. 1999;53:387–95.CrossRef
47.
Albuquerque UP, Andrade LHC, Silva ACO. Use of plant resources in a seasonal dry forest (Northeastern Brazil). Acta Bot Bras. 2005;19:27–38.CrossRef
48.
Alves RRN. Animal-based remedies as complementary medicine in Brazil. Forsch Komplementmed/Res Complement Med. 2008;15:226–7.
49.
Colwell R. Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples, version 8.2. 0. In: User’s guide and application Google Scholar; 2009.
50.
Kruskal WH, Wallis WA. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 1952;47:583–621.CrossRef
51.
Kruskal WH, Wallis WA. Errata: use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 1953;48:907–11.CrossRef
52.
Hammer H, HARPER D, Ryan P. PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron. 2001;4:9.
53.
Thomsen J, Brautigam A. Sustainable use of neotropical parrots. In: Neotropical wildlife use and conservation; 1991. p. 359–79.
54.
Ferreira FS, Albuquerque UP, Coutinho HDM, Almeida WO, Alves RRN. The trade in medicinal animals in northeastern Brazil. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012.
55.
Souto WMS, Torres MAR, Sousa BFCF, Lima KGGC, Vieira LTS, Pereira GA, Guzzi A, Silva MV, Pralon BGN. Singing for cages: the use and trade of Passeriformes as wild pets in an economic center of the Amazon—NE Brazil route. Trop Conserv Sci. 2017;10:1–19.CrossRef
56.
Zardo EL, Behr ER, Macedo A, Pereira LQ, Lovato M. Aves nativas e exóticas mantidas como animais de estimação em Santa Maria, RS, Brasil. Revista Acta Ambiental Catarinense. 2016;11:33–42.
57.
Birkhead T, Van Balen S. Bird-keeping and the development of ornithological science. Arch Nat Hist. 2008;35:281–305.CrossRef
58.
Nash SV. Sold for a song: the trade in southeast Asian non-CITES birds. Cambridge: Traffic Southeast Asia; 1993.
59.
Alves RRN, Mendonça LET, Confessor MVA, Vieira WLS, Vieira KS, Alves FN. Caça no semi-árido paraibano: uma abordagem etnozoológica. A Etnozoologia no Brasil: Importância, Status atual e Perspectivas Volume. 2010;4:347–77.
60.
Bezerra DMM, Araujo HFP, Alves RRN. The use of wild birds by rural communities in the semi-arid region of Rio Grande do Norte State, Brazil. Biorem Biodiv Bioavail. 2011;5:117–20.
61.
Barbosa EDO, Silva MGB, Medeiros RO, Chaves MF. Atividades cinegéticas direcionadas à avifauna em áreas rurais do Município de Jaçanã, Rio Grande do Norte, Brasil. Biotemas. 2014;27:175–90.CrossRef
62.
Barbosa JAA, Nobrega VA, Alves RRN. Aspectos da caça e comércio ilegal da avifauna silvestre por populações tradicionais do semi-árido paraibano. Revista de Biologia e Ciências da Terra. 2010;10:39–49.
63.
Nobrega VA. Apectos do uso e comércio de aves silvestres por populações tradicionais do agreste paraíbano. In: Anais do IX Congresso de Ecologia do Brasil; 2009. p. 3.
64.
Alves RRN, Nogueira EEG, Araujo HFP, Brooks SE. Bird-keeping in the Caatinga, NE Brazil. Hum Ecol. 2009;38:147–56.CrossRef
65.
Souza JB, Alves RRN. Hunting and wildlife use in an Atlantic Forest remnant of northeastern Brazil. Trop Conserv Sci. 2014;7(1):145–60.
66.
Fernandes-Ferreira H, Mendonça SV, Albano C, Ferreira FS, Alves RRN. Hunting, use and conservation of birds in Northeast Brazil. Biodivers Conserv. 2011;21:221–44.CrossRef
67.
68.
Cantú-Guzmán JC, Sánchez-Saldaña M, Grosselet M, Silva-Gámez J. Tráfico ilegal de pericos en México: una evaluación detallada. Washington, DC: Defenders of Wildlife; 2007.
69.
Wright TF, Toft CA, Enkerlin-Hoeflich E, Gonzalez-Elizondo J, Albornoz M, Rodríguez-Ferraro A, Rojas-Suárez F, Sanz V, Trujillo A, Beissinger SR. Nest poaching in Neotropical parrots. Conserv Biol. 2001;15:710–20.CrossRef
70.
Roldán-Clarà B, López-Medellín X, de la Barca NC, Leyva C, Espejel I. Mexican birds use according to environmental officers. Ethnobiol Conserv. 2017;6:1–18.
71.
Santos I, Costa-Neto E. Estudo etnoornitológico em uma região do Semi-Árido do estado da Bahia, Brasil. Sitientibus Série Ciências Biológicas. 2007;7:273–88.
72.
Souza GM, Soares Filho AO. Comércio ilegal de aves silvestres na região do Paraguaçu e sudoeste da Bahia. Enciclopédia Biosfera. 2005;1.
73.
Teixeira PHR, do Nascimento Thel T, Ferreira JMR, de Azevedo SM, Junior WRT, Lyra-Neves RM. Local knowledge and exploitation of the avian fauna by a rural community in the semi-arid zone of northeastern Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2014;10:81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
74.
Sick H. Ornitologia Brasileira. 3rd ed. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira; 2001.
75.
Sigrist T: Avifauna brasileira: guia de campo Avis Brasilis. 2013.
76.
Filloy J, Bellocq MI. Spatial variations in the abundance of Sporophila seedeaters in the southern Neotropics: contrasting the effects of agricultural development and geographical position. Biodivers Conserv. 2006;15:3329–40.CrossRef
77.
Mason NA. Diversification rates and phenotypic evolution in the neotropical seed-eaters (genus Sporophila). In: Society FO, editor. 129th stated meeting of the American ornithologists’ union, Jacksonville, University of Florida. Florida: Florida Ornithological Society; 2011.
78.
Assis IA, Lima DC: Uma introdução ao comércio ilegal de aves em Itapipoca, Ceará. 2007.
79.
80.
Nascimento CAR, Czaban RE, Alves RRN. Trends in illegal trade of wild bird in Amazona State, Brazil. Trop Conserv Sci. 2015;8:1098–113.CrossRef
81.
Nunes PB, Barreto AS, Franco EZ. Subsídios à ação fiscalizatória no combate ao tráfico de aves silvestres e exóticas em Santa Catarina. Ornithologia. 2012;5:26–33.
82.
Pereira GA, Brito MT. Diversidade de aves silvestres brasileiras comercializadas nas feiras livres da Região Metropolitana do Recife, Pernambuco. Atualidades Ornitológicas. 2005;126:14.
83.
Alves RRN, Lima JRF, Araujo HFP. The live bird trade in Brazil and its conservation implications: an overview. Bird Conserv Int. 2013;23:53–65.CrossRef
84.
Alves RRN, Mendonça LE, Confessor MV, Vieira WL, Lopez LC. Hunting strategies used in the semi-arid region of northeastern Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5:12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
85.
Matias CAR, Pereira IA, Reis EMF, Rodrigues DP, Siciliano S. Frequency of zoonotic bacteria among illegally traded wild birds in Rio de Janeiro. Braz J Microbiol. 2016;47:882–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
86.
Allgayer MC, Cziulik M. Reprodução de psitacídeos em cativeiro. Revista Brasileira de Reprodução Animal. 2007;31:344–50.
87.
Ayres OM. Os animais dos Campos Gerais (PR): Impactos ambientais noticiados pela imprensa regional. In: Publicatio UEPG: Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde, vol. 12; 2006.
88.
Firmino AMS, Seixas G. O tráfico de animais silvestres no pantanal de Mato Grosso do Sul: caracterização e recomendações. In: Resumo executivo do relatório final do Projeto de Implementação de Práticas de Gerenciamento Integrado de bacia Hidrográfica para o Pantanal e Bacia do Alto Paraguai Campo Grande, Instituto Pantanal; 2003. p. 51.
89.
Fernandes-Ferreira H, Alves RRN. The researches on the hunting in Brazil: a brief overview. Ethnobiol Conserv. 2017;6:1–6.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Understanding the motivations for keeping wild birds in the semi-arid region of Brazil
Authors
Wallisson Sylas Luna de Oliveira
Sérgio de Faria Lopes
Rômulo Romeu Nóbrega Alves
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1746-4269
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-018-0243-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

Sociodemographic differences in the cultural significance of edible and toxic mushrooms among Tsotsil towns in the Highlands of Chiapas, Mexico

Research

Astonishing diversity—the medicinal plant markets of Bogotá, Colombia

Research

Traditional ecological knowledge-based assessment of threatened woody species and their potential substitutes in the Atakora mountain chain, a threatened hotspot of biodiversity in Northwestern Benin, West Africa

Research

Status and factors influencing on-farm conservation of Kam Sweet Rice (Oryza sativa L.) genetic resources in southeast Guizhou Province, China

Research

Indigenous knowledge of dye-yielding plants among Bai communities in Dali, Northwest Yunnan, China

Research

Traditional uses of medicinal plants practiced by the indigenous communities at Mohmand Agency, FATA, Pakistan