The Secondary Problem

It is now widely known that we are at the brink of exhaustion in the world of parrot rescue, the ever growing numbers of homeless parrots in the USA and UK is now largely contributing to a more hidden and controversial issue. This is what I call the secondary problem.

The secondary problem is one founded on the basis of greed, animal hoarding and exploitation. The issue is now far greater than the amount of homeless parrots; the real issue is now the many unethical, immoral and inhumane parrots sanctuaries and rescuers there are operating in this field. These individuals are operating in an ungoverned lawless ground, where the true rights and welfare of the birds are not adhered to.

The true nature of rescue has been lost for many amidst financial opportunity, exploitation and pure materialistic gain. There are fundamental processes and ethics which should be in place within any reputable rescue and these are not to be found within many 'rescues'. A good basis for any rescue would be to stand at the forefront of halting the vicious circle of mass exploitation; one of the most obvious starting points for this would be to support a Don’t Breed, Don’t Buy policy. There simply is no longer a need to breed birds, with just a little research on the Internet and by making general enquiries with real rescuers, enlightenment of the reality in terms of the large uphill battle they face every year where the numbers of birds handed to them increase.

Birds are born free, we do not own them so it is only fitting that no money changes hands when a bird is rescued. Money is not beneficial to the bird, only to those who wish to profit from something which, ethically they should not. It would also be appropriate to stand against breeding in the interests of Psittacine welfare on a national scale, if you are breeding, promoting or support this act in any fashion, then all you are doing is adding to the exploitation of millions of birds annually.

Birds are all individuals; they are intelligent, emotional creatures that need us, their carers to make their many day to day decisions. Surveying each birds needs is needed greatly, it is not sufficient to make a general judgement on the bird, opting to place every single bird that comes into the rescues care into an aviary, so as it can live as ‘nature intended’ outdoors and amongst other birds is a very general assumption We have domesticated these animals into thinking they are one of us, yes, some are truly wild at heart and long to be with other birds, yet others have been moulded, physically and emotionally into thinking they are human. Therefore their needs must be met by us, they need a human companion, a human family, and it is then the carer’s role to re educate the bird in a time appreciated by the bird itself. These animals have been abused by us, in a bid to ‘tame the beast’ for thousands of years. We have bred these animals in their millions, profited from the mass market of these poor souls, brought them into our homes, placed them in a cage, treated them as mere ornaments, and then moaned when they have exhibited wild behaviours.

This vicious circle must stop.

So, you may be asking, what can I do?, well it has become even more obvious that the biggest issue is a simple lack of education. People do not realise what It is to care for a bird, there are also too many opportunities for people to simply go out and buy a bird on impulse. What needs to happen is for a true halt on all birds sold in pet shops up and down the country to be put into place and all available birds be placed into a national network of re homing centres, where strict criteria must be met before placement of a bird happens. An in-depth education programme should be undertaken as part of the re homing process. By heightening the criteria required to become a bird carer and reducing the opportunities for birds to be readily purchased, along with a properly governed system, we may just save the captive parrot from becoming the most abused and exploited creatures of our lifetime.

Educate people about the plight of the captive parrot, be realistic when people enquire about ‘owning a bird’ many people do not realise the reality of what is is to live with a parrot, always outline the noise, the mess, the cost, the effort, the time and the patience it takes to even adequately care for them. Push for laws and protection of these animals.

If you care for a parrot, be the best carer you can be all of the time, understand and meet your bird’s intelligence and emotion, provide them with a healthy nutritional diet, an avian vet, a clean safe living environment, enrichment and support as well as a flock and a relationship whereby they can safely depend on you.

Rescuing an animal and giving them a second chance is one of the most rewarding things in life, to see an animal step out from the darkness of discontent and flourish in a way they have never before is one of the best things you as a human can give back to the world. Please help stop the secondary problem before it overtakes the real issue here, it will be a very sad world if one day we have to rescue birds from the ‘rescues’.

A Place To Land

http://www.flyawayfilms.com/default.html

In Defence Of Animals - The Captive Bird Campaign

Both One And The Same

The bird doing loop-the-loops in the cage and pulling out its feathers is not just playing and preening. Stress may cause these activities and also may provide insight into similar human behaviours, according to researchers.
A study of abnormal repetitive behaviours practiced by Orange-winged Amazon parrots indicates that environment plays a role in two types of behaviour that the caged birds perform. One of the behaviours, feather picking, closely mirrors compulsive behaviours in humans, according to Purdue University and University of California at Davis researchers. The study also helped debunk a time-worn belief that parrots teach each other feather picking.

"There is a lot of merit in studying abnormal behaviours just in terms of figuring out ways to control them for the welfare of both companion animals and those bred for production agriculture," said Joseph Garner, a Purdue assistant professor of animal sciences and the study's lead author. "Another benefit is that if animal abnormal behaviour is caused in the same way as in humans, then we may have a whole new range of model animals for studying human mental disorders."

The researchers initially were trying to determine if parrots' abnormal behaviours are of two categories. One category is composed of a constant repetition of meaningless gestures or movements called stereotypies, and the
other is a repetition of inappropriate complex behaviour that normally would have a specific goal, such as feather picking.

"I've thought for awhile that we should start looking at these behaviours in animals as if they are two different types," Garner said. "Then, if we treated stereotypies and compulsive behaviours as if they were in humans, maybe we would improve our treatments in birds."
Behaviour problems, including feather picking and screeching, can be very distressing to owners and contribute to birds being surrendered for adoption, Garner said. Many of these birds are euthanized because their behaviour is untreatable. People often mistake the stereotypies, such as walking circles on the sides of cages or twirling pieces of feed in their beaks, as playing.
All of these behaviours are abnormal and often are a reaction to environmental factors, the researchers said. The major factor triggering an increase in stereotypies in parrots was a lack of neighbours for socialization, according to the study.

In contrast, physical environment, including cage placement, was a key factor generating feather picking by the parrots used in the study, Garner said. The scientists found that parrots with cages that didn't allow a view of doors where people entered the room were less likely to engage in feather picking.

"For parrot owners and breeders, one thing our research shows is that it might be worth putting a lot of thought into where the cage is positioned in the room," Garner said. "I think with a lot of care and a lot of forethought, these behaviours are manageable and preventable, especially considering our earlier work that demonstrated the positive effects of social housing and environmental enrichments, such as foraging and climbing devices.

"We're just translating what the animals are trying to tell people through behaviour. We hope the breeders can turn it into something practical."
Sixty-four birds were used in the study, evenly divided between males and females. They ranged in age from 5-11 years old. Lights were on in the rooms from 8 a.m. until 7 p.m. each day, and the birds were videotaped from 9-11 a.m. Each bird was given a score depending on how much it picked at its feathers.

The results showed that birds with no view of the entry door showed no difference in feather picking no matter how close they were to the door, the researchers reported. In contrast, birds that faced the door feather picked more depending on the distance of their cage to the door.
The researchers also found that feather picking was more common in female birds, which parallels compulsive hair pulling in people, called trichotillomania. According to the study results, age didn't impact the amount of feather picking.

"Behaviour is like an organ as much as a lung or a heart is," Garner said. "Like an organ, behaviour highly affects us, and it's the animal's first and last resort for defence. Animals change their behaviour in order to meet challenges in the environment."
Abnormal behaviours can have a major impact not only on private owners, but also on entire industries.

A study conducted in Australia a few years ago showed that feather picking by hens caused them to eat more to make up for loss of body heat. This resulted in an 8 percent loss in income, or as much as a $50 million loss for the Australian egg-laying industry.

People often think animals teach each other certain bad behaviours, Garner said. But he and his research team took into consideration a number of factors, such as age, genetic relationship, placement of cages and sex, and it became clear that the parrots were reacting to their environment and/or to a genetic malfunction.

"We busted the myth that feather picking is socially transmitted, at least in the birds we studied," he said. "This is exciting because with the strong heritability of feather picking that we found, it might be possible to breed parrots that don't have the propensity to develop this behaviour."

The other researchers involved in this study were Cheryl Meehan, Thomas Famula and Joy Mench all of the UC Davis Department of Animal Sciences.
The Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust, a Key Bank Trust, provided support for the project.
Writer: Susan A. Steeves, (765) 496-7481, ssteeves@purdue.edu
Sources: Joseph Garner, (765) 494-1780, jgarner@purdue.edu
Ag Communications: (765) 494-2722; Beth Forbes, forbes@purdue.eduAgriculture News Page

PHOTO CAPTION:Orange-winged Amazon parrots often exhibit inappropriate behaviour, some of which is very similar to compulsive behaviours in people. This parrot has lost many of its feathers by constantly picking at them. (Photo courtesy of Cheryl Meehan, University of California at Davis)

ABSTRACT

Genetic, Environmental and Neighbour Effects on the Severity of Stereotypies and Feather Picking in Orange-winged Amazon Parrots (Amazona amazonica): An Epidemiological Study
Joseph P. Garner, Cheryl L. Meehan, Thomas R. Famula, and Joy A. Mench
Stereotypies and psychogenic feather picking represent two distinct forms of abnormal behaviour in parrots, with implications for welfare and owner relinquishment. While both behaviours are common in captive parrots, relatively little is known about the factors that may predispose a parrot to their development. To assess the effects of potential social, environmental, and genetic factors, we performed an epidemiological study of a colony of 64 Orange-winged Amazon parrots. We first used mixed model methods to assess the narrow heritability, or genetic determination, of stereotypy, which was -0.08 +/- 0.14, and feather picking, which was 1.14 +/- 0.27. We then focused our study on one room of 27 birds that had always been housed in the same cage location. We examined the effects of neighbour behaviour, number of neighbours, sex, family, age, cage row (beside an aisle or beside a wall), and distance from the door, on each behaviour. Stereotypy was negatively correlated with the number of neighbours, but was unaffected by any other factor. In contrast, feather picking was affected by family, was more severe in females, and was progressively more severe in birds housed closer to the door when they had a direct line of sight of the door. Feather picking was spatially clustered in the room, but siblings from particular families were also more likely to be housed as neighbours than were non-siblings. Given the strong effect of family on feather picking and the effect of proximity to the door, these factors together explained the spatial clustering of feather picking. In addition, the feather picking of neighbours was uncorrelated. Thus, there was no evidence for social transmission of feather picking. Our results indicate that cages should be located away from potential stressors, and suggest that there is a potential for breeding against feather picking behaviour in parrots. Finally, the markedly different genetic and environmental effects on stereotypes versus feather picking emphasizes that these are two distinct classes of abnormal repetitive behaviour in parrots.

Freedom Eating Away At Freedom

It seems certain individuals cannot control themselves when given the freedom to express and say how they feel under the guise of ‘anonymous’.

I have allowed freedom of speech on this blog from the very beginning, regardless of where you ‘stand’ and what I really did not expect from anybody commenting on here were the childish comments, petty spats and diversion tactics being used.

I would like to suggest to those who are content to hide behind 'anonymous' and abuse these posts to either read or comment on material that is to your intellectual preference such as OK magazine, or simply refrain from commenting alltogether.

If childish comments are continued to be made on other posts I will have no choice but to move them here, where you can throw rocks amongst yourselves. I will also be left with no alternative but to remove the anonymous comment option, as I like everybody else am sick of reading the same old tosh.


"The fox knows many things, the hedgehog one big thing"

Responsibility And Morality

The Five Freedoms -

1. Freedom from Hunger and Thirst - by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.

2. Freedom from Discomfort - by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.

3. Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.

4. Freedom to Express Normal Behaviour - by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal's own kind.

5. Freedom from Fear and Distress - by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.

The Mylo and JJ situation.

What we have here is a simple situation which can be discussed in terms of Responsibility and Morality.

Responsibility –

1.) The State, quality, or fact of being responsible.
2.) Something for which one is responsible, a duty, obligation or burden

Morality –

1.) The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct
2.) A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct
3.) Virtuous conduct
4.) A rule or lesson in moral conduct

Caron is responsible for Mylo under the duty of care, as Adele / UKPR are responsible for JJ. The responsibility for these birds has been split. What needs to be discussed is ultimately who will gain full responsibility for the two birds, as keeping them separate has been deemed unsuitable.

Adele originally declared that she would not be able to offer Mylo & JJ a permanent home, so Caron had been chosen to supply them with a home. Now UKPR were confident enough at the time to choose Caron, so the question still remains unanswered – If Caron and her home had been deemed suitable for both Mylo & JJ why is she and her home now no longer suitable?

Whatever personal differences you may have, there is no question that Caron cannot give both Mylo and JJ the care they both require. What has been raised is that Adele by her own submission was no longer in a position to care for Mylo & JJ on a permanent basis. Now I understand since first submitting that information, she since changed her mind. What had changed in the hours from when they were collected to be taken to Caron's?

Mylo arrived at Caron's in ill health, he is still in ill health as he continues to have an undiagnosed condition, and it is Caron's moral obligation to put the health of Mylo before anything else in relation to his care. It has been raised that to move him would be unfair and stressful which is one of the many reasons Caron made the choice not to move him. As JJ is in the care of Adele and UKPR they too have the moral obligation to put her health before anything else in relation to her care and this is where the biggest question comes into play - As Mylo & JJ were a bonded pair and the separation of these two seems to have had the worst effect on JJ (we have been informed that since the seperation of the two, her plucking has accelerated), is it not the moral obligation of Adele / UKPR to send JJ to Caron's so they can be re united and return to good health and happiness? After all this outcome was what was originally planned for Mylo and JJ.

The truth in the situation I believe is this - Caron is perfectly capable, experienced and suitable to provide both Mylo and JJ a forever home, the simple reluctance to send JJ to Mylo in Caron's home and under her care is purely based on a personal dislike from UKPR’s side. Is this really fair on Mylo and JJ? To let such a fickle matter stand so strongly in the way of what ultimately is a decision that is going to impact the rest of their natural lives really is not in the best interests of Mylo and JJ’s welfare.

Whispers In The Silence

I would like to think that there are many more individuals out there, questioning and thinking over the Milo & JJ situation and i would like to ask those who have kept quiet until now to come forward and voice their opinions as well as give their input , regardless of where they stand. It is vital we gain as much information, critisism and questioning as possible so we can move forward from this situation and really begin to make changes for the future of Avian Welfare.