I think from the perspective of this pyramid we should look at the part labeled "flight" at the top as referring to the act of flight itself and the benefits it brings to the bird that no other source can provide. I totally agree that flight CAN provide a large amount of mental stimulation and that in the wild a parrot uses flight to meet a large fraction of the needs in the lower parts of the pyramid. However, I think those needs are needs in their own right, separate from the need for flight, and that they can be met by means other than flight. Certainly we can find examples of pet parrots that have lived for many decades in a clipped state and which were not observed to be overtly miserable. How do we measure the level of happiness of a parrot? When I look at Scooter I look at his behaviors to gauge his "happiness" -- is he eating, sleeping, playing? Is he eager for interaction? Is he free from screaming, plucking or other undesirable behaviors? Are there other metrics we should use to judge how much happier a bird might be if allowed indoor flight? And how much happier that same bird would be if allowed complete freedom to live a natural life with unrestricted flight outdoors? How can we judge this without anthropomorphizing or projecting our own needs and desires onto the bird?
Michael put it this way:
Michael wrote: This is all speculation here as it is impossible to get inside a parrot's head and ask it how important flight is to its well being,
And this I agree with. However, I think there are indicators besides trying to figure out how to think like a bird that give us a clue as to how well they are doing. Since I'm a scientist by training, I need to see EVIDENCE that allowing flight produces a much happier and healthier bird in order to be convinced that it is a fact.
I think without the ability to fly to be able to do this, they would feel deprived of fulfilling some of their natural desires.
I think what you are saying is that if you imagine yourself a bird, you imagine feeling that way -- but you aren't a bird. So it makes you feel better to provide flight, but it doesn't create proof that flight is superior. I don't think we can really nail this down as a gedanken experiment because none of us really know how to think like a bird.
One thing that plays into all of this is that a hand-raised parrot is about as far from the natural state of the animal as any creature we keep as companions. Dogs, cats and horses all have more connection to their "roots" unless they are bottle raised orphans. I would also guess that we are in the process of selectively breeding birds that are relatively happy in these circumstances because very unhappy birds don't mate and reproduce.
, I think this one is one we must accommodate as it is what makes them a bird.
You have stated this on other threads and I think it is one place where we have a fundamental disagreement. I don't agree that flight is what makes a bird a bird. There are species of birds that aren't flighted at all. There are so many things that make a bird a bird besides flight -- their social natures, their vocal communications, their grooming behaviors, their problem-solving abilities -- these may or may not have evolved partly due to flight, but they now exist whether flight is present or not.
I can only speculate what a clipped parrot would feel like but I could imagine it would be like a human immobilized of their legs for whatever reason. They can sit in bed or couch all day and have all their needs provided for. But would they not miss walking? Even if they were born without the ability to walk. Would they not miss it?
Not necessarily. I actually hold a therapeutic horseback riding instructor's certification and I have worked with disabled children in that capacity (on a volunteer basis). It really completely depends on the individual. The one adult I worked with who was in the program pursuant to a traumatic brain injury at work which affected both his locomotion and cognitive/emotional state was in stark contrast to most of the other students -- he did resent his immobility, but it was something he had his whole life and he was bitter. Most of the kids, even those who are cognitively normal, pretty much roll with the cards they have been dealt. At least until they get to a certain age. You have to have a concept that the world owes you the ability to walk before you can resent the inability. A two or three or even six year old child typically doesn't formulate this kind of resentment, so even if you imagine a parrot as being a soft of small feathered three year old, I don't think it would have the dubious mental sophistication to think it "ought" to be able to fly and to therefore stew over it. A bird that has been flighted that is then deprived of flight might express frustration if it's unmet needs could be met by flying at a given moment, but I think that is different.
I also think that most humans deprived of the ability to walk would spend some time mourning that loss, but if they are mentally healthy and have the emotional support they need, they will move past that and not lie around waiting for their needs to be met. They will learn to use prostheses or a wheelchair and they will figure out how to adapt their behavior so that they can meet their needs. There were plenty of wheelchair athletes in the LA marathon this weekend, for example. MY gross speculation is that a clipped parrot would move straight on to figuring out how to get its needs met rather than lying around and stewing about it.
Besides my comparison to parrots in the wild, I just look at my own parrot to understand how important flight must be to their psychological well being. She had been clipped initially and now she is flighted. It has been roughly the same amount of time that she was clipped as she has been flighted so I think it is a fair comparison of before and after.
This is good anecdotal evidence. We are all biased observers observing our own feathered companions, though, so it would be even more compelling to me if an unbiased observer reported the same things. With my own bird, it seems to me that if he got any MORE secure, he'd be running the household! Yes he sometimes wants to be somewhere he isn't that it is difficult (or too dangerous) for him to get to on his own, but within reason we accommodate that when he's out of cage.
So I guess I remain unconvinced that the benefits of flight in and of itself in the well-kept pet parrot are so dominant that they warrant compromising on the items lower in the pyramid as I have drawn it -- or even compromising on the ability of the humans to coexist with the parrot beyond a certain point. If one can arrange for all those things to be covered AND allow flight, too, that's great. But I think it may do many pet parrots a disservice to strongly emphasize flight because I think other needs, including safety and having a human to provide the other items, are going to be much harder to meet. I suppose eventually all the unwanted parrots would die out and the market would adjust, but that seems a bit harsh, they are rather long-lived.