Mixing biotopes avian-aquatic

[NetMax]

This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so perhaps
there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium canopy, what
if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top of an open
aquarium. This would keep the fish from jumping out. Power wires will
go through the bars which could be made of stainless steel rods (no
rust). The lights would be in the top of the birdcage (tank would not
overheat). Birds would stay warm (between the lights and the heat of the
water beneath them). There would be no need to clean the bottom of your
bird cage (aquarium filter would require a skimmer and be much more
powerful to keep up with the additional organic matter. Whatever birds
were being kept would need to prefer the warm humid environment (the
humidity could be controlled to a degree, but it would never be too dry
in there) and would be selected to not be fish predators (hopefully ;~).

I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar. It
pooped a lot, but not more than a filtration system could handle. A
single small bird (or perhaps 2) over a 5 foot tank might be a manageable
bioload addition. It might be possible to have some natural plants
growing up the sides, whose roots were dropping into a nylon mesh box
submersed in the aquarium (feeding on nitrates, but the root system could
be contained). Access would be through a bottom section of the front,
which hinged upwards (effectively closing the cage from the bottom, when
opened for aquarium access).

The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is either acceptable
to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The challenge might
be in proper bird selection, freshwater skimmer system and upgraded
filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks please ;~)?
--
www.NetMax.tk

[Charles]

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:07:07 -0500, "NetMax"
> wrote:

>This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so perhaps
>there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium canopy, what
>if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top of an open
>aquarium. This would keep the fish from jumping out. Power wires will
>go through the bars which could be made of stainless steel rods (no
>rust). The lights would be in the top of the birdcage (tank would not
>overheat). Birds would stay warm (between the lights and the heat of the
>water beneath them). There would be no need to clean the bottom of your
>bird cage (aquarium filter would require a skimmer and be much more
>powerful to keep up with the additional organic matter. Whatever birds
>were being kept would need to prefer the warm humid environment (the
>humidity could be controlled to a degree, but it would never be too dry
>in there) and would be selected to not be fish predators (hopefully ;~).
>
>I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar. It
>pooped a lot, but not more than a filtration system could handle. A
>single small bird (or perhaps 2) over a 5 foot tank might be a manageable
>bioload addition. It might be possible to have some natural plants
>growing up the sides, whose roots were dropping into a nylon mesh box
>submersed in the aquarium (feeding on nitrates, but the root system could
>be contained). Access would be through a bottom section of the front,
>which hinged upwards (effectively closing the cage from the bottom, when
>opened for aquarium access).
>
>The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is either acceptable
>to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The challenge might
>be in proper bird selection, freshwater skimmer system and upgraded
>filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks please ;~)?


Been done, in a less asthetic way.

A friend of mine moved to Thailand, and bought into a fish farm,
raising tilapia. They raise chickens above the pond, the chickens
crap into the water, green algae grown from the droppings, and the
fish eat the algae, then people eat the fish.

I forget the type of tilapia, it's a sterile hybrid, so they don't end
up with of millions of stunted fish. I did some net-looking a while
back, that particular fish has an amazing (to me) tollerance for
ammonia in the water.

[Steve]

NetMax wrote:
> This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so perhaps
> there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium canopy, what
> if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top of an open
> aquarium...
> I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar.

Netmax, you're a very imaginative guy!

Your post makes a wonderful change from "other" posts that cropped up today.

Have you considered a duck :) ?

Steve

[Elaine T]

NetMax wrote:
> This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so perhaps
> there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium canopy, what
> if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top of an open
> aquarium. This would keep the fish from jumping out. Power wires will
> go through the bars which could be made of stainless steel rods (no
> rust). The lights would be in the top of the birdcage (tank would not
> overheat). Birds would stay warm (between the lights and the heat of the
> water beneath them). There would be no need to clean the bottom of your
> bird cage (aquarium filter would require a skimmer and be much more
> powerful to keep up with the additional organic matter. Whatever birds
> were being kept would need to prefer the warm humid environment (the
> humidity could be controlled to a degree, but it would never be too dry
> in there) and would be selected to not be fish predators (hopefully ;~).
>
> I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar. It
> pooped a lot, but not more than a filtration system could handle. A
> single small bird (or perhaps 2) over a 5 foot tank might be a manageable
> bioload addition. It might be possible to have some natural plants
> growing up the sides, whose roots were dropping into a nylon mesh box
> submersed in the aquarium (feeding on nitrates, but the root system could
> be contained). Access would be through a bottom section of the front,
> which hinged upwards (effectively closing the cage from the bottom, when
> opened for aquarium access).
>
> The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is either acceptable
> to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The challenge might
> be in proper bird selection, freshwater skimmer system and upgraded
> filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks please ;~)?

You're missing the propensity of parrots to drop at least 50% of the
food given to them. Food is a toy. Some days it's more like 80%.
Taste...drop...taste...drop. A filter *might* keep up with the poop,
but I can't imagine it would keep up with the food too. Oh - and
parrots need to chew on things, so don't forget all the wood shavings
and bits of bird toys in the water.

Maybe you could do this with canaries or finches, but I don't think parrots.

--
Elaine T __
http://eethomp.com/fish.html <'__><
rec.aquaria.* FAQ http://faq.thekrib.com

[NetMax]

"Elaine T" > wrote in message
et...
> NetMax wrote:
>> This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so
>> perhaps there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium
>> canopy, what if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top
>> of an open aquarium. This would keep the fish from jumping out.
>> Power wires will go through the bars which could be made of stainless
>> steel rods (no rust). The lights would be in the top of the birdcage
>> (tank would not overheat). Birds would stay warm (between the lights
>> and the heat of the water beneath them). There would be no need to
>> clean the bottom of your bird cage (aquarium filter would require a
>> skimmer and be much more powerful to keep up with the additional
>> organic matter. Whatever birds were being kept would need to prefer
>> the warm humid environment (the humidity could be controlled to a
>> degree, but it would never be too dry in there) and would be selected
>> to not be fish predators (hopefully ;~).
>>
>> I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar. It
>> pooped a lot, but not more than a filtration system could handle. A
>> single small bird (or perhaps 2) over a 5 foot tank might be a
>> manageable bioload addition. It might be possible to have some
>> natural plants growing up the sides, whose roots were dropping into a
>> nylon mesh box submersed in the aquarium (feeding on nitrates, but the
>> root system could be contained). Access would be through a bottom
>> section of the front, which hinged upwards (effectively closing the
>> cage from the bottom, when opened for aquarium access).
>>
>> The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is either
>> acceptable to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The
>> challenge might be in proper bird selection, freshwater skimmer system
>> and upgraded filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks
>> please ;~)?
>
> You're missing the propensity of parrots to drop at least 50% of the
> food given to them. Food is a toy. Some days it's more like 80%.
> Taste...drop...taste...drop. A filter *might* keep up with the poop,
> but I can't imagine it would keep up with the food too. Oh - and
> parrots need to chew on things, so don't forget all the wood shavings
> and bits of bird toys in the water.
>
> Maybe you could do this with canaries or finches, but I don't think
> parrots.
>
> --
> Elaine T

Lorikeets were what I was thinking of.
http://www.birdsnways.com/mowen/lories.htm Small Australian parrot whose
recommended diet is nectar and chopped fruits. I carried one on my
shoulder for a while, when working in the fish room. I learned to put
him down frequently, so that he could do his business before I'd put him
back on my shoulder (or he would climb up by whatever path looked
convenient, often through my sleeves to pop up under my collar while I
was talking with a customer :o). I don't know if he would habitat well
above an aquarium, but if he did, then I'd need fish which would eat the
fruits he dropped (that should be easy enough).

At the time I was trying to bring some traffic to the other depts,
figuring pet people were pet people. This wasn't altogether accurate
though. The dog & cat people tended to be generalists and were open to
keeping other small animals, small animal keepers (mice, gerbils,
rabbits, ferrets etc) could be interested in birds, but bird people and
fish people were more tightly focussed on their own hobby, and the
reptile people were in another world ;~). I did build a chameleon tank
which was part aquatic with albino Clawed African frogs, but it was
counter-productive, increasing sales of African frogs instead of
reptiles.
--
www.NetMax.tk

[NetMax]

"Steve" > wrote in message
.. .
> NetMax wrote:
>> This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so
>> perhaps there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium
>> canopy, what if a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top
>> of an open aquarium...
>> I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar.
>
> Netmax, you're a very imaginative guy!
>
> Your post makes a wonderful change from "other" posts that cropped up
> today.
>
> Have you considered a duck :) ?
>
> Steve

ROTFL :o) There is little question about that bird's aquatic
compatibility, but it would have to be a big tank and I'm quite sure
ducks eat fish! While it might not always seem so, the fish *are* my
primary hobby :p
--
www.NetMax.tk

[Koi-lo]

"NetMax" > wrote in message
. ..
> This probably best belongs in a bird ng, but I don't know any so perhaps
> there are some birders here. Instead of a closed aquarium canopy, what if
> a metal screened cage (a bird cage) were fitted on top of an open
> aquarium. This would keep the fish from jumping out. Power wires will go
> through the bars which could be made of stainless steel rods (no rust).
> The lights would be in the top of the birdcage (tank would not overheat).
> Birds would stay warm (between the lights and the heat of the water
> beneath them).

Uh, oh! I can see all the bird poop and seed hulls fouling the tank below.

There would be no need to clean the bottom of your
> bird cage (aquarium filter would require a skimmer and be much more
> powerful to keep up with the additional organic matter.

LOADS and LOADS of organic matter.

Whatever birds
> were being kept would need to prefer the warm humid environment (the
> humidity could be controlled to a degree, but it would never be too dry in
> there) and would be selected to not be fish predators (hopefully ;~).

What if the bird "falls in?"

> I was thinking of a small parrot I'd seen which only ate nectar. It
> pooped a lot, but not more than a filtration system could handle. A
> single small bird (or perhaps 2) over a 5 foot tank might be a manageable
> bioload addition. It might be possible to have some natural plants
> growing up the sides, whose roots were dropping into a nylon mesh box
> submersed in the aquarium (feeding on nitrates, but the root system could
> be contained). Access would be through a bottom section of the front,
> which hinged upwards (effectively closing the cage from the bottom, when
> opened for aquarium access).

You've got entirely too much time on your hands.


--
Koi-Lo.... frugal ponding since 1995...
Aquariums since 1952
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy
Troll Information:
http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm
Reading Headers:
http://www.technomom.com/writing/headers.shtml
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>

[Koi-lo]

"NetMax" > wrote in message
.. .

> Lorikeets were what I was thinking of.
> http://www.birdsnways.com/mowen/lories.htm Small Australian parrot whose
> recommended diet is nectar and chopped fruits. I carried one on my
> shoulder for a while, when working in the fish room. I learned to put him
> down frequently, so that he could do his business before I'd put him back
> on my shoulder (or he would climb up by whatever path looked convenient,
> often through my sleeves to pop up under my collar while I was talking
> with a customer :o). I don't know if he would habitat well above an
> aquarium, but if he did, then I'd need fish which would eat the fruits he
> dropped (that should be easy enough).

I hope they're good swimmers. :-)))


--

Koi-Lo.... frugal ponding since 1995...
Aquariums since 1952
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy
Troll Information:
http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm
Reading Headers:
http://www.technomom.com/writing/headers.shtml
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>

[Jan]

I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste. Those
parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts and
liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around the
cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.

Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing requirements")
http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html

I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then pick it
up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The walls/floor
around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet pellets, etc. So I
ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he soon learned to unscrew
the nuts and bolts, but that's another story).

Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
plants are toxic to birds.

As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I see
is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the water
(same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and as they
flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders that take
care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at the front for
the bird), so this may not be a problem.

I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are MUCH
less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back to a
regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need to sweep
daily around the cage.

I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at bright
fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's just
something to consider.

That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's an
interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at least
partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all depends on the
number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A couple of budgies or
finches would live quite happily in such a setup, with minimal amount
of waste.

As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the bird's
habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer dry bushy
grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots would probably
tolerate humidity better, since many live in tropical forests. One
thing to note, though: bird's respiratory system is very sensitive, so
excessive humidity could be a problem.

Jan

[NetMax]

"Jan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste. Those
> parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts and
> liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around the
> cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.
>
> Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing requirements")
> http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html
>
> I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
> spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then pick it
> up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The walls/floor
> around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet pellets, etc. So I
> ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he soon learned to unscrew
> the nuts and bolts, but that's another story).
>
> Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
> plants are toxic to birds.
>
> As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I see
> is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the water
> (same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and as they
> flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders that take
> care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at the front for
> the bird), so this may not be a problem.
>
> I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are MUCH
> less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back to a
> regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need to sweep
> daily around the cage.
>
> I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at bright
> fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's just
> something to consider.
>
> That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's an
> interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at least
> partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all depends on the
> number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A couple of budgies or
> finches would live quite happily in such a setup, with minimal amount
> of waste.
>
> As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the bird's
> habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer dry bushy
> grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots would probably
> tolerate humidity better, since many live in tropical forests. One
> thing to note, though: bird's respiratory system is very sensitive, so
> excessive humidity could be a problem.
>
> Jan

Thanks Jan, it was a small Lorikeet that I was thinking about, less than
half the size of your conure. You have brought up a lot of factors I
hadn't considered. The feathers in the water would add design work to
the filtration. Acrylic sides would 'contain' their mess, but add
maintenance. No live plants. Concerns around lighting and ventilation.
I think I'll stick to all-fish, much easier, though that site did say
they like to bathe daily (that would have worked out well ;~).
thanks again!
--
www.NetMax.tk

[Gill Passman]

NetMax wrote:
> "Jan" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste. Those
>>parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts and
>>liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around the
>>cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.
>>
>>Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing requirements")
>>http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html
>>
>>I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
>>spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then pick it
>>up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The walls/floor
>>around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet pellets, etc. So I
>>ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he soon learned to unscrew
>>the nuts and bolts, but that's another story).
>>
>>Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
>>plants are toxic to birds.
>>
>>As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I see
>>is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the water
>>(same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and as they
>>flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders that take
>>care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at the front for
>>the bird), so this may not be a problem.
>>
>>I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are MUCH
>>less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back to a
>>regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need to sweep
>>daily around the cage.
>>
>>I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at bright
>>fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's just
>>something to consider.
>>
>>That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's an
>>interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at least
>>partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all depends on the
>>number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A couple of budgies or
>>finches would live quite happily in such a setup, with minimal amount
>>of waste.
>>
>>As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the bird's
>>habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer dry bushy
>>grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots would probably
>>tolerate humidity better, since many live in tropical forests. One
>>thing to note, though: bird's respiratory system is very sensitive, so
>>excessive humidity could be a problem.
>>
>>Jan
>
>
> Thanks Jan, it was a small Lorikeet that I was thinking about, less than
> half the size of your conure. You have brought up a lot of factors I
> hadn't considered. The feathers in the water would add design work to
> the filtration. Acrylic sides would 'contain' their mess, but add
> maintenance. No live plants. Concerns around lighting and ventilation.
> I think I'll stick to all-fish, much easier, though that site did say
> they like to bathe daily (that would have worked out well ;~).
> thanks again!

My main concern would be that birds need to fly - so the height of the
hood would be a major consideration - unless of course you are thinking
of letting it out from time to time....

Gill

[NetMax]

"Gill Passman" > wrote in message
.. .
> NetMax wrote:
>> "Jan" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>>I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste. Those
>>>parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts and
>>>liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around the
>>>cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.
>>>
>>>Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing requirements")
>>>http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html
>>>
>>>I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
>>>spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then pick
>>>it
>>>up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The walls/floor
>>>around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet pellets, etc. So
>>>I
>>>ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he soon learned to unscrew
>>>the nuts and bolts, but that's another story).
>>>
>>>Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
>>>plants are toxic to birds.
>>>
>>>As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I
>>>see
>>>is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the water
>>>(same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and as they
>>>flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders that take
>>>care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at the front for
>>>the bird), so this may not be a problem.
>>>
>>>I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are MUCH
>>>less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back to a
>>>regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need to sweep
>>>daily around the cage.
>>>
>>>I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at bright
>>>fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's just
>>>something to consider.
>>>
>>>That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's an
>>>interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at least
>>>partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all depends on
>>>the
>>>number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A couple of budgies
>>>or
>>>finches would live quite happily in such a setup, with minimal amount
>>>of waste.
>>>
>>>As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the bird's
>>>habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer dry bushy
>>>grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots would probably
>>>tolerate humidity better, since many live in tropical forests. One
>>>thing to note, though: bird's respiratory system is very sensitive, so
>>>excessive humidity could be a problem.
>>>
>>>Jan
>>
>>
>> Thanks Jan, it was a small Lorikeet that I was thinking about, less
>> than half the size of your conure. You have brought up a lot of
>> factors I hadn't considered. The feathers in the water would add
>> design work to the filtration. Acrylic sides would 'contain' their
>> mess, but add maintenance. No live plants. Concerns around lighting
>> and ventilation. I think I'll stick to all-fish, much easier, though
>> that site did say they like to bathe daily (that would have worked out
>> well ;~).
>> thanks again!
>
> My main concern would be that birds need to fly - so the height of the
> hood would be a major consideration - unless of course you are thinking
> of letting it out from time to time....
>
> Gill

I'd envisioned it as the same dimensions of the tank, 60"x18" and 24"
high, so this would be a reasonably large cage. I'm not sure about the
necessity of their flight time. At the pet shop, they would trim
something in their wings to prevent them from flying. My lorikeet would
only occasionally fly off, and it couldn't do much more than flutter a
few feet away from me.

In any case, the whole idea was just an idle thought, as I've been told,
I have too much time on my hands (though I prefer to think that I'm a bit
more productive with my time, to have the time to daydream ;~).
--
www.NetMax.tk

[Daniel Morrow]

Mid posted.
Gill Passman wrote:
> NetMax wrote:
>> "Jan" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>> I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste.
>>> Those parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts
>>> and liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around
>>> the cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.
>>>
>>> Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing
>>> requirements") http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html
>>>
>>> I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
>>> spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then
>>> pick it up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The
>>> walls/floor around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet
>>> pellets, etc. So I ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he
>>> soon learned to unscrew the nuts and bolts, but that's another
>>> story).
>>>
>>> Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
>>> plants are toxic to birds.
>>>
>>> As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I
>>> see is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the
>>> water (same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and
>>> as they flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders
>>> that take care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at
>>> the front for the bird), so this may not be a problem.
>>>
>>> I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are
>>> MUCH less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back
>>> to a regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need
>>> to sweep daily around the cage.
>>>
>>> I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at
>>> bright fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's
>>> just something to consider.
>>>
>>> That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's
>>> an interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at
>>> least partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all
>>> depends on the number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A
>>> couple of budgies or finches would live quite happily in such a
>>> setup, with minimal amount of waste.
>>>
>>> As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the
>>> bird's habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer
>>> dry bushy grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots
>>> would probably tolerate humidity better, since many live in
>>> tropical forests. One thing to note, though: bird's respiratory
>>> system is very sensitive, so excessive humidity could be a problem.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>
>>
>> Thanks Jan, it was a small Lorikeet that I was thinking about, less
>> than half the size of your conure. You have brought up a lot of
>> factors I hadn't considered. The feathers in the water would add
>> design work to the filtration. Acrylic sides would 'contain' their
>> mess, but add maintenance. No live plants. Concerns around
>> lighting and ventilation. I think I'll stick to all-fish, much
>> easier, though that site did say they like to bathe daily (that
>> would have worked out well ;~).
>> thanks again!
>
> My main concern would be that birds need to fly

I wonder if non-flying birds (i.e. damaged birds or just bird species that
can't fly) would be great for this application? Good luck and alter!

- so the height of the
> hood would be a major consideration - unless of course you are
> thinking of letting it out from time to time....
>
> Gill

[Elaine T]

Gill Passman wrote:
> NetMax wrote:
>
>> "Jan" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>> I agree with Elaine. Large birds create lots and lots of waste. Those
>>> parrots that eat nectar are called lorikeets. They eat friuts and
>>> liquid food, so expect to see food splattered everywhere around the
>>> cage. These birds are best kept in terrarium-type enclosures.
>>>
>>> Check out the following site, (scroll down to "housing requirements")
>>> http://research.amnh.org/users/nyneve/loryFAQ.html
>>>
>>> I used to keep a medium-sized parrot (a green cheek conure), and he
>>> spit his food everywhere. He would soak his food in water, then pick it
>>> up, shake his head, and it would splatter everywhere. The walls/floor
>>> around his cage was covered with bits of fruit, wet pellets, etc. So I
>>> ended up building an acrylic cage for him (he soon learned to unscrew
>>> the nuts and bolts, but that's another story).
>>>
>>> Also, live plants in a parrot cage will be instantly shredded. Many
>>> plants are toxic to birds.
>>>
>>> As for smaller birds - they are much less messy. The only problem I see
>>> is seed hulls. These are light, and will float on top of the water
>>> (same with feathers). Birds like to exersize their wings, and as they
>>> flap, the seed hulls fly everywhere. Now, there are feeders that take
>>> care of this (covered on all sides except an opening at the front for
>>> the bird), so this may not be a problem.
>>>
>>> I keep budgies at the moment, in that same acrylic cage. They are MUCH
>>> less messy than a larger parrot. Still, I would never go back to a
>>> regular wire cage. All the mess is inside, so there's no need to sweep
>>> daily around the cage.
>>>
>>> I have read somewhere that birds can go blind if they stare at bright
>>> fluorescent light. I can't find a reference now, but that's just
>>> something to consider.
>>>
>>> That's just a list of issues that comes to mind, but overall, it's an
>>> interesting idea. Given my love for acrylic cages, I would at least
>>> partially cover the sides of the cage. But again, it all depends on the
>>> number/types of birds, and the size of the tank. A couple of budgies or
>>> finches would live quite happily in such a setup, with minimal amount
>>> of waste.
>>>
>>> As for humidity, I can only speculate. That would depend on the bird's
>>> habitat. Most african finches, as well as budgies, prefer dry bushy
>>> grasslands, some finches live in humid areas. Parrots would probably
>>> tolerate humidity better, since many live in tropical forests. One
>>> thing to note, though: bird's respiratory system is very sensitive, so
>>> excessive humidity could be a problem.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks Jan, it was a small Lorikeet that I was thinking about, less
>> than half the size of your conure. You have brought up a lot of
>> factors I hadn't considered. The feathers in the water would add
>> design work to the filtration. Acrylic sides would 'contain' their
>> mess, but add maintenance. No live plants. Concerns around lighting
>> and ventilation. I think I'll stick to all-fish, much easier, though
>> that site did say they like to bathe daily (that would have worked out
>> well ;~).
>> thanks again!
>
>
> My main concern would be that birds need to fly - so the height of the
> hood would be a major consideration - unless of course you are thinking
> of letting it out from time to time....
>
> Gill

Many pet hookbills never even learn to fly. You keep their wings
clipped for safety. They love to climb and swing - they're quite the
little acrobats. They certainly need room, but not necessarily a flight
cage.

--
Elaine T __
http://eethomp.com/fish.html <'__><
rec.aquaria.* FAQ http://faq.thekrib.com

[Richard Sexton]

>The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is either acceptable
>to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The challenge might
>be in proper bird selection, freshwater skimmer system and upgraded
>filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks please ;~)?

Woudn't that be a bit humid for birds? I'm also having difficult
thinking of any aquarium filter that could deal with the crap any
of the birds I've kept put out. I think you'd have to grow tomato
plants to deal with it all. Right decorative THAT would be.


--
Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home page: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net

[Marco Schwarz]

Hi..

> The downside is the evaporation, which in some cases is
> either acceptable
> to downright desirable, but still a chore to manage. The
> challenge might be in proper bird selection, freshwater
> skimmer system and upgraded
> filter system. What am I missing (no crude remarks please

A hungry water snake that eat those birds what fall in
water! ;-)))
--
cu
Marco