George Alfred Smith, 1931-2006

Abstract

"You know, we did it all wrongcmbserved Dr. Smith as he contemplated San Francisco traffic out the window of a #38 (Geary) bus. IDie should have fought your Revolutionary War to its conclusion, hanged George Washington as a traitor, and held onto to the Coloniesrnmtil you leaned to drive on THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ROAD!"

We were on our way to Golden Gate Park, to the California Academy of Sciences, whose Curator and Chair of Ornithology and Mammalogy, Luis Baptista, had urged me to kidnap Dr. Smith from the 1985 AFA National Convention and bring him to see him. I had not met Dr. Smith before, so was somewhat cautious as I introduced myself after his fascinating presentation on Asian Parakeets, and suggested playing hooky to the museum. He stared at my name badge and asked 'iilou're not American, are you, Josef?

You pronounce all your consonants. Most American say 'Ferdy' and you would say 'Forty'. That's why I asked.

I (born and raised in Berkeley, California) was used to people saying I talked funny. Occasionally some one might compliment my tfiteresting accento But until then, no one had ever said why. Analytical thinking and a complete lack of hesitation in asking penetrating questions were typical of George Smith. So were a sardonic wit and a truly encyclopedic erudition that extended far beyond aviculture and ornithology. While lecturing on his beloved Caiques, George made reference to the 17th Century diarist John Evelyn, who we think evil, because he broke his dog's legp it being his opinion that clipping the wings of pet parrots was scarcely worse. He mailed me Thomas Huxley's response to a letter of sympathy from Charles Kingsley, after the death of Huxley's son. He was always ready to quote Alfred, Lord Tennyson's In Memorium, or perform an exuberant rendition of Lewis Carroll's Jaberwocky, compete with stabbing gestures (One Two! One Two! And through and through!Pin a crowd while waiting to get into the AFA banquet hall, no less!). Through a good portion of a visit to the San Antonio Zoo, he whistled the [aken from a county jailO!efrain from The Mikado.

And he was a consummate story teller [[)ne reason he was in demand as an AFA speaker, appearing at nationals at least five times over a nineteen year span, to my knowledge. George produced a very convincing creaking noise as he described opening a box, with rusty hinges, in a small English country church. This contained generations of baptismal records for a parish whose members probably never traveled more than fifteen miles from where they were born. That particular investigation stemmed from his fascination with inbred populations and the resulting expression of mutations, as recessive genes came together in far greater frequencies than otherwise. But that's how you get your mutations! he would exclaim, when aviculturists expressed a horror of inbreeding. His vast knowledge of mutations was another reason he was popular at conventions. Some of his American visits were sponsored by organizations of mutation Ring-neck breeders, and he was close friends with such well-known Psittacula mutation specialists as Rick Jordan, Roger Bringas, and Babu Chauhan. His book Lovebirds and Related Parrots (Smith, 1979) is an exhaustive catalogue of the mutations recorded for Psittacula and Agapornis through the 1970's. It is also replete with avicultural history, another of his great interests.

George's study of mutations was motivated by far more than avicultural interest, being but one manifestation of his profound interest in evolutionary biology. His exploration of psittacine taxonomy (Smith, 1975) established him as an ornithologist, though his academic credentials were as a veterinarian. His paper, laying out his revision of parrot systematics, runs fifty pages in the Ibis, the august publication of the British Ornithologist's Union, and continues to be cited by such luminaries as Joseph Forshaw and Nigel Collar. George published a four page summary in the first chapter of his Lovebirds and Related Parrots (Smith, 1979). Some of his more startling proposals, such as segregating the New World parrots in their own family (Aridae), or placing Rosellas, Kakarikis, Budgies, Neophernas, and other Grass Parakeets together with Cockatoos, Keas, and Kakapos, in a family separate from other parrots (Platycercidae), have not become widely accepted. Other conclusions, however, are not questioned today. It is widely recognized that the lories do not warrant status as a family (born out, long after the publication of his paper, by the production of hybrids between Swainson's Lorikeets and King...