An examination of the drawbacks (negative conservation) of  the addition of these 14 species, or any exotic species, to the U.S. ESA:

Parrots species not presently listed on the ESA are represented by genetically healthy viable populations in US aviculture. The founder birds of these healthy US captive populations were imported prior to the WBCA in 1992. The WBCA act has successfully prevented importation of these species since 1992 (protected wild parrot species from trafficking).

Every parrot species currently listed under the ESA has suffered severe negative consequences in efforts to maintain a captive-bred  genetically viable  population within the US. In fact, due to the onerous burden placed on breeders to obtain Interstate commerce permits or Captive-bred wildlife registrations to sell birds across a State line, inbreeding coefficients of  species currently listed are very high. Furthermore, the captive populations of many species listed on the ESA have decreased . Captive, responsibly bred, populations of these parrots may be very important in the future. The USFWS Puerto Rican Parrot captive breeding program is a case in point. Without captive breeding and supplementation of the tiny wild population, the Puerto Rican Parrot would most certainly be extinct today.  The proposed legislation would unilaterally negatively affect captive breeding efforts of these species with no foreseeable positive consequence on the wild populations:

Adverse effect on captive-bred populations of past ESA listed (exotics) parrots:

The Golden Conure (Guaruba guarouba) example:
Listing of the Golden Conure has had a severe detrimental effect on its captive breeding. Listing on the ESA places severe restrictions on the sale and movement of this species within the US and between states. This legislation, which was in fact intended to conserve the species, has resulted in a detrimental decline in the captive population size and genetic viability.

The Cuban Amazon (Amazona leucocephala) example:
The Cuban Amazon has become one of the most poorly represented parrots in US captive breeding efforts.

The Thick-billed Parrot (Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha):
The Thick-billed Parrot is almost unknown in US aviculture and captive breeding efforts.

Regarding the Blue-headed Macaw.  Recent wild population estimates of the Blue-headed Macaw by Brightsmith, et. al have demonstrated that the wild population is far larger and more widespread than previous estimates. Based on this recent data, Bird Life International is presently considering “downlisting” the species from its Red List, from “Endangered” to “Vulnerable”.

In summary, there is no viable scientific value in adding these 14 species to the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Conversely, there is a predictable detrimental consequence of this addition, whereby the captive breeding population and domestically supported genetic diversity of these species will be negatively affected.

Currently, captive breeders and aviculture in general, are the main potential contributors of  reintroduction captive individuals to in situ conservation efforts of exotic parrot species. To further limit their commerce here in the United States through listing under the U.S. ESA would begin to erode that financial base of support. Is Congress willing to pick up the tab for exotic species conservation and captive breeding of these species?

If the addition of these fourteen species to the Endangered Species Act guaranteed substantial funding for the recovery and conservation of these species, then the benefits might outweigh the liabilities and detrimental effects on the captive breeding populations. Since there is no available funding, and no foreseeable source in this economic climate, then the liabilities severely outweigh the assets, as the genetic pool and diversity of these species in US aviculture and captive breeding programs would be severely, negatively affected.

Mark Stafford
President, Parrots International