Parrot keeping- Are We The Problem?

[Pajarita]

Let me know if you can think of one single problem that is not directly caused by our keeping them captive - I tried and couldn't come up with a single one.

[TooLove]

Let me know if you can think of one single problem that is not directly caused by our keeping them captive - I tried and couldn't come up with a single one.

We had a patient this past summer, a moluccan cockatoo with a squamous cell carcinoma just distal to her shoulder. Wild caught, so not genetics (at least human-influenced). Diet? Potentially, but likely not; her owners took excellent care of her. Too much time out in the sun? Also not likely especially given her lifestyle. Sometimes cancer or illness just happens. It occurs naturally in wild populations of animals too.

I'm not trying to say that we aren't the problem here, but there are always exceptions. I just don't like blanket statements (again, purely semantics). Birds in nature have issues too. Again, the vast majority of problems I see with people and their birds are largely attributed to their husbandry, the lack of education and abundance of misinformation and the lifestyle of their humans. But hey, I've seen my fair share of problems in dogs, cats, and other animals that are also purely the fault of public demand, breeding, owner ignorance or neglect. Does this mean humans shouldn't keep pets at all? At what point do you draw the line? Parrots probably have a higher prevalence of these problems mainly because of this notion that birds are 'easy keepers' and that you can shove them in a cage and throw seed and water at them, only interact with them when you feel like it or you want to show off the 'arm candy' that you referred to earlier, never take them to the vet, and banish them to that room you never use when the novelty wears off. Most people have no idea what they're getting themselves into, which is the main problem.

[Pajarita]

Well, the cancer could have been caused by exposure to those stupid 'bird' lamps which were not designed for birds at all but for reptiles and simply re-labeled. People follow the instructions of the manufacturers (or people on birdsites) and clamp the lamps to the top of the cage which is waaaaay too close (birds have gone blind because of them, too).

But, yes, of course that wild birds have congenital defects (only they don't survive because the parents don't feed them so they die in the nest) and I am pretty sure there are some that get cancer but never in the same proportion as captive-bred birds. Exceptions are just that: exceptions - but the rule still stands.

And I am all for people keeping pets (although I don't like the connotations of that word, I prefer companion animals -did you know that veterinarians are the group that fights the most against designating pets as companion animals?) only they should NOT keep undomesticated species with complex physical and psychological needs and parrots fall in this category. Why? Because regardless of how good the husbandry and the set-up is, and how dedicated and knowledgeable the caregiver is, they still suffer in captivity.

[marie83]

I actually believe all animals suffer in captivity, even so called domesticated ones, even fish, even small furries like hamsters..... The pet trade will never stop though so those animals will need homes. I will never support a pet shop (that sells live animals, I will buy from dry goods only though but those are hard to find) or breeder again though.

[Pajarita]

I don't think ALL domesticated animals suffer, some are pretty happy about their lot in life. It all depends on how they are treated -and that's another issue with the cruelty laws we have.

[marie83]

I don't think ALL domesticated animals suffer, some are pretty happy about their lot in life. It all depends on how they are treated -and that's another issue with the cruelty laws we have.

Maybe but we've interfered so much with a lot of them genetically that whilst I do believe that they are better suited for a life in captivity than their wild counterparts I can't believe they are ever enriched enough or fit in with humans enough to be completely stress free, happy, fulfil their breeding instincts, get enough exercise, properly fed etc. Appearing and acting in a way that makes us feel they are happy is one thing- I dare say the majority of parrot owners "think" their pets are 100% happy too. I used to think the hamsters I used to keep when I was a kid in huge rotastack setups were happy and fulfilled but now I seriously doubt they were 100% happy- just tolerant (through having no choice) and making the best of what they had like getting their exercise on their wheels with the same old scents in the same old environment instead of running across the desert, smelling the scent of a female or food nearby etc

[Pajarita]

Oh, yes, you are 10% right, most people do think their pet parrots are happy when there is no way on this green earth that they could possibly be! But domesticated animals were bred to live and thrive under different conditions than their wild progenitors so, although the ones that were taken out of the wild and all the generations that came after that until humans achieved their genetic goal must have suffered, the ones we have now don't if they are treated right. I am pretty sure my dogs and cats are happy. And I am sure I could keep happy chickens, cattle, sheep, etc. Same as I am sure my parrots are relatively content with their lives but not happy even though they have a life closer to what nature ordained for them from what most pet parrots have. I guess the point I am trying to get across is that, for domesticated animals, if you know what you are doing and are willing and able to do it, the animals that live with you can have a happy, fulfilled life but, when it comes to undomesticated species, the bar is so much higher that it's pretty impossible to achieve it.

[TooLove]

It might be impossible to achieve it, but the difference between yourself and someone else is that you are constantly looking for ways to improve your parrots quality of life. Not everyone does that. Granted, a captive-bred bird doesn't know what it's missing out on per se, but when you limit the capacity to perform natural behaviors that's when you run into problems. The solution is not necessarily to replicate nature to a T, but to find other ways and outlets for them to express these behaviors.

Also, I would be inclined to disagree with your statement that veterinarians oppose the term companion animals. I don't take classes on "pets" in vet school, I take classes on companion animals. Companion Animal Medicine, Clinical Behavior of Companion Animals, etc. I can show you my schedule if you'd like. I have yet to encounter a textbook that doesn't use the term companion animals either. And, as a future vet, I also have issues with calling animals pets. They are friends, family, and companions. The vast majority of veterinarians understand this.

[Matt Alyk]

Well, of course we're the problem. We put parrots in captivity in the first place. Not against pets or anything, that's just the proof. As for what you said, I never really though about that too much. A satisfactory amount of food causes problems related to hormones, that's a tricky subject. No good owner wants their parrot to be hungry, but does always being full cause more problems than it solves? Would keeping a parrots day shorter than twelve hours, not petting them as much, and giving them a little less food keep down mating instinct? Maybe. The fact is, a lot of problems are caused by keeping them in captivity, but as rain forests are becoming more industrial and a pet trade that nobody will be able to stop, we have to make an effort to provide them with good homes. Like I said, I'm not what you would call an environmentalist (I love nature, though) and I'm not against having pets, but that's just the truth.

[Pajarita]

It might be impossible to achieve it, but the difference between yourself and someone else is that you are constantly looking for ways to improve your parrots quality of life. Not everyone does that. Granted, a captive-bred bird doesn't know what it's missing out on per se, but when you limit the capacity to perform natural behaviors that's when you run into problems. The solution is not necessarily to replicate nature to a T, but to find other ways and outlets for them to express these behaviors.

Also, I would be inclined to disagree with your statement that veterinarians oppose the term companion animals. I don't take classes on "pets" in vet school, I take classes on companion animals. Companion Animal Medicine, Clinical Behavior of Companion Animals, etc. I can show you my schedule if you'd like. I have yet to encounter a textbook that doesn't use the term companion animals either. And, as a future vet, I also have issues with calling animals pets. They are friends, family, and companions. The vast majority of veterinarians understand this.

I am all for the alternative ways and outlets but when you talk about species that are so very specialized in their needs, it's never enough.

And it's not 'my' statement on the veterinarians opposing legislation to change pets status, they are the ones that donate the most (lobby) to keep them as they are. A 'higher' status means more expense when it comes to malpractice. Most of them don't even have insurance for this because, as it is, even if they mess up get sued and lose, all they have to pay is the monetary value of a replacement because, under the law, pets are considered property but, if their status implied a closer relationship with humans, it would mean pain, suffering and emotional distress and that ups the bill tremendously.