Jump to content

Talk:Egyptian goose

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old

[edit]

There is no good description of the bird in the article. The pictures also don't show the distinctive round brown dot on the bird's breast. In Afrikaans the bird is called a "Kolgans" which means "dot-goose" after this feature. Oom Kosie (talk) 17:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reference but I don't understand how to add it to the list. Someone please fix this.--41.152.34.197 (talk) 12:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

they like to swim alot  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.249.149.162 (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Test

[edit]

Does it quack or honk or what? Readers of this article want to know. Chrisrus (talk) 05:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian Geese spotted in South Florida

[edit]

Three Egyptian Geese came to our inland lake in Boca Raton, Florida. Could not find them in any of my bird books until I looked in "The Sibley Field Guide to Birds" on page 61 at the bottom left corner. Then I looked on the web and found plenty of references to the species under its name along with its Latin name: Alopochen aegyptiacus. They are wide spread in Kenya, the Nile in Egypt (hence the name) and Africa. Also Eastern Anglia (UK) and in Germany, where evidently they are sometimes considered pests. However, they are beautiful birds, curious, and ate some seed I put out. They finally walked away with "dignity." because the Muscovy Ducks I feed who are territorial about the seeds made them unwelcome. I too helped cause them to leave when I tried to photograph them. PS: I just looked out and they are back and having a staring contest with the Muscovies. They are back after a half hour and are eating peacefully with the Muscovies. So far, I have not heard a single sound honk, quack or hiss from them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.1.212 (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also had a sighting of a small group in Palm Beach County yesterday. There seem to be numerous local news articles, youtube videos and photos documenting their existence there. --74.166.233.166 (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Had One show up in Naples, Fl. on 3/6/2013. took some nice pictures. First time seeing one. it gets along well with my other goose and chickens and other ducks in my lake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.96.15 (talk) 23:46, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


They're also in Huntington Beach, California. I first spotted a mated couple at Carr Park in 2002, they returned every year until the female was killed in traffic. But in 2004 there were two pairs. By 2008 there were at least two distinct family groups, maybe a dozen of these geese altogether. People say that a fair number of these geese are scattered around other local parks and golf courses - basically the only places with trees and "fresh" water. These geese are distinctive and memorable, everybody has their own theory about them escaping a circus or whatnot. They're quite "tame" and "pleasant" and accustomed to (illegally) being fed by park visitors, they're not very territorial, but they've become increasingly aggressive towards (and a gradually displacing) the ducks and Canadian geese over the years. I've never seen them at the local wild bird sanctuary/preserve, probably because there's too little greenery and too many predators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.143.43 (talk) 22:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feral or not feral

[edit]

User Innodata wants to at all cost 'dominate' the article, going as far as breaking a number of crucial WP rules (so source and original research) - just because information that he added was removed from the article and will not listen to reason. In his drive to trurn the information to the article, Innodata says "they are domesticated, also though I can't find a source for this quickly". I though the rule was, first find the source, then include the information.

In his attempt to push his point, Innodata changed what was correct "It is native to Africa south of the Sahara and the Nile Valley, and has been introduced to parts of Western Europe." to a statement that will support his claims of a feral stage "They have been raised for food and extensively bred in parts of Africa since they were domesticated by the ancient Egyptians. Because of their popularity chiefly as ornamental birds feral populations have become established in Western Europe". This is simply wrong - the fact that they are native to MOST of Africa has been eliminated, definitely native to 90% of sub-Saharan Africa - and NOT since they were domesticated by the Egyptians. And they are NOT BRED - they live in the wild!!!! I have lived in Angola, Namibia, and South Africa, and been to all other countries in Southern Africa. Egyptian geese are NOT bred by people in any of these countries. They have goats, pigs, chickens and cattle, sometimes closer to urban centres people might have a few ducks. NOT Egyptian geese. Yes, we have them in the cities in parks around city lakes etc - most of them adopt the lakes of their own accord, just like guinea fowl.

There are lots of grey areas when it comes to the distinction between domestic/ domesticated/ run-away/ feral/ street (street dogs)/ stray animals/ invasive species.

  • Some animals accept livig near humans - squirrels, for example; they will even come and eat out of your hand.
  • Others can be domesticated, but one day might just decide to away. You can domesticate an elephant, but if it one day decides to go back into the bush.
  • If it runs away it is NOT a feral elephant, but a domesticated elephant that ran away. Nor will its offspring be feral, merely wild animals. They would be the case even if they were living in the jungles of South America.
  • They will at most be an invasive species that accidentally escaped, just like so many others.

If you think the Egyptian goose is a domesticated animal, then please read/ consult

Let's be reasonable and put the project first. Starting with returning the correct information to the article. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is referenced, and not original research, I provided sources for the fact that they are domesticated to an extent, and that call them "feral", as you could see if you examined my changes and edit summaries more carefully. I just haven't looked in a library for better sources to fill in more details. They are kept and bred widely in Africa, and in Europe have been domestic, extensively bred birds for at least several centuries continuously. All that feral means, at least in English, is having reverted to the wild from a domesticated state, so I'd think, escaped elephants descended from captive stocks would be defined as feral. I also did not remove the discussion of their native range, but merely rearranged the text to allow new information I provided to be added and improve the flow. —innotata 01:33, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Innodata, like I said, there are grey areas, it really does not make that much difference anyway. I was just annoyed that I was left with the distinct impression that most of the infomation that you added was to strengthen the case for domesticated populations, from which the feral populations came. Be that as it may. It is water off a goose's back.
What I wantd to bring to your attention as you seem to be quite keen on birds, is that before posting yesterday I read the articles in a number of languages and found it interesting that in the German WP is says that: (quick translation - fruit of my living in Namibia as a teenager) "in historical times it also occurred in the Balkans, where it is today extinct. As recent as the 19th century, it was regularly seen in Bulgaria and Hungary. It is likely that it also bred there, but this has not been established beyong doubt". Not quite sure I would consider Hungary to be in the Balkans, but perhaps they are referring to Hungary in the 19th century, before being carved up. So, unlike the 'modern' populations in Europe today, this would be a natural occurring population that probably spent the African winter there (as they are not sure that they bred there). Quite fascinating. The reference is not much help - it takes you to an ISBN and a page where you can locate the book. Pity. Best regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw that about the Balkans as well. I'll certainly look into it and add it. Just wondering, do you still dispute what I added? —innotata 12:12, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it is not about disputing what you said, but rather that it might indeed hinge on one's personal understanding of the concept of feral - and there we are in agreement, if you look at your "feral is not defined narrowly" in one of your edit summaries and my "there are grey areas", cited hereinabove. I do however still feel these are not feral populations, as the domesticated populations are a small minority, as opposed to traditionally recognised feral populations, of which the wild ancestors no longer or hardly exist, such as pigeons, horses, cats, dogs. I also feel that the intro is now lopsided, saying more about the domesticated populations than about the ones living in their natural and native habitat. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 13:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The fact is, the birds in Europe come from those small populations, from birds that were domestic for some time. Yes, the lead needs to better, but the whole article is rather short. —innotata 14:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correct binomial please?

[edit]

Could someone give me the correct binomial please, with proper citation? This article has Anser aegyptiacus, which appears to be common nowadays, but Anser aegyptiaca seems to have about equal support in such literature as I have found online. In fact "Anas aegyptiaca Linnaeus is the type of Alopochen" in [1] suggests that the latter is correct. However, I do not know where to find the definitive authority, and I would like this article to have proper support, preferably mentioned explicitly in such a case. Anyone? JonRichfield (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Birders have been using Alopochen aegyptiaca since at least 2009. Lars Svensson, Killian Mullarney and Dan Zetterstrom. Collins Bird Guide. 2nd Edition, Collins, 2009, page 22. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On Wikipedia we standardise to the IOC world list. It looks as if there has ben a gender correction recently, as with Common House Martin.Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See also Taxonomic recommendations for British birds Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this bird in orange, California. 3 of them at Santa Ana riverbank. Feb 10 2017

Egyptian Goose photographed in Hagerstown, Maryland, USA

[edit]

I have seen photographs on Flickr showing an Egyptian Goose in Hagerstown, Maryland, USA on January 1, 2020. The images are designated "All Rights Reserved," but are marked publicly viewable. Here is the link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sunsades/49318843051. I don't know enough about the animal to know if this merits mention on the page or if these photos would count as evidence but I wanted the people who DO know to hear about this in case it's worth changing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preserved killick (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why that would be worth adding to the article? Egyptian geese show up all over the world, from New Zealand to the US. It becomes a little more interesting if they establish invasive breeding populations, but that does not seem to be the case here. One would require somewhat more authoritative sources than personal photos for that in any case. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:57, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Egyptian_goose&oldid=1246751174"