By Birdlady - Parrot Society NZ

In light of last months zoo escape it's interesting people still advocate unclipped wings. (August 2002)
This is a comment from the World Parrot Trust mailing list. Any replies I can send back to the WPT list if you wish (it's a closed list and only WPT members can recieve posts or reply to members through the list.

I came to keeping parrots from a different background to most. I have very little direct experience of working with birds that cannot fly. Where clients present with clipped birds I tend to imp these birds' wings to restore flight immediately, where this is possible. I don't really understand the point in having birds whose mobility is restricted. I wouldn't keep a dog if it had to be chained up.
From the clients and cases I work with, the coincidence of enforced flight impairment (the euphemism for clipping I sometimes have to use so as not to upset those whose default practice is to cripple birds) with self plucking and self mutilation is too strong to be ignored. I eventually worked out the 'aetiology' of many cases of self plucking/mutilation . It goes like this:

Young bird is clipped. Cannot fly to gain height (has frustrated escape reflex response) so cannot execute its most basic 'flight or hide' response to dangers (which it has been perfecting for millions of years, and which aspect of its life has contributed so much to it being a bird in the first place).
So-called 'deviant' or displacement behaviours manifest as substitutes for frustrated escape reflex. These include self plucking/mutilation, stereotypical movements, excessive screaming and sometimes aggressive cage-territorial behaviours etc.
All pretty much predictable stuff really when you know birds, so not exactly rocket science stuff here.

My original understanding of birds -their biology, behaviour and evolution comes from an ornithological background. This gives you a totally different perspective compared to the often hideous things perpetuated as 'standard practice' in aviculture. In a short email as this, I cannot describe accurately these differences in perspective and understanding of birds and their needs; I'd need to write a book for that, so bear with me if you will!

My 'default' methods for being with captive birds, is to use my knowledge of what they do in the wild as my guide to how to keep them in captivity. So, obviously there is no place for deflighted birds for me. A clipped bird might as well be a grounded hamster substitute pet. The reasons why birds need to fly are ingrained in the 150 million years that birds have been perfecting flight. Try "The Origin & Evolution of Birds" by A Feduccia, Yale Univ 1999 for stuff on this (Feduccia kills the dinosaur-to -bird myth too).

My 'default' methods for being with captive birds, is to use my knowledge of what they do in the wild as my guide to how to keep them in captivity. So, obviously there is no place for deflighted birds for me. A clipped bird might as well be grounded hamster substitute pet. The reasons why birds need to fly are ingrained in the 150 million years that birds have been perfecting flight. Try "The Origin & Evolution of Birds" by A Feduccia, Yale Univ 1999 for stuff on this (Feduccia kills the dinosaur-to -bird myth too).

For me it is a fundamental principle that animals in captivity should be able to perform as many of their natural behaviours as is possible. By this I mean that it is our duty as the birds' guardian to ensure the bird is provided with the facilities and time to be able to behave as it has evolved to behave. This principle allows you to adopt a fail-safe method (in terms of the behavioural needs of the birds). For me, denying flight to a bird, would be like denying galloping for a horse, or denying running for a child etc. It's not merely 'unacceptable', it's actually unthinkable. Indeed such restrictions on a creature's movements says more about the psychology of the individual and of society's attitude regarding the 'control' of animals then anything else (another book in there too!).

The idea that letting captive birds fly should be something new or even 'challenging' is just too weird for me. Letting birds fly is about as novel as brushing your teeth, it's just something that should happen anyway; it's normal, and too obvious to be something that one should even have to actually recommend. But of course, we DO have to recommend it because some weird culture of keeping deflighted pet birds has been allowed to become 'acceptable' in aviculture. Aviculture is not even on the learning curve graph yet, with regard to some of the vile things it continues to perpetuate. Might as well try and suggest we keep fish out of water so we can cuddle them too!

All you have to do with pet birds is train them to obey some basic flight commands, then you have reasonable 'control' (if we can call it that) of the birds movements. The advantage with birds over mammalian pets is that birds learn ten times quicker than a dog or horse would to agree to accept some requests. Sometimes birds learn things in a few minutes, though usually it does take longer. Training usually results in default bonding, so the need for recall is reduced. With trained birds it can actually be difficult to get them to fly away from you and stay away. Both my sun conure and my T grey do not like to lose sight of me when they are outdoors.

Given all the above, I have to say, there is a huge difference between normal indoor/aviary flight (which all birds should be able to do every day of their lives as this is a minimal behavioural requirement) and free (outdoor) flight. I would not recommend anyone to do free outdoor flight at all. The circumstances to be able to do this, as Pam mentioned are special. You need to have the right 'habitat' for the bird, good neighbours and be able to climb trees very well! And you have to know the behavioural repertoire of the bird you are flying. But for me, the most important thing is that you have to be familiar with your wild birds' calls and behaviour, and be able to react to these instantly so as to ensure the safety of your bird when it is out. A buzzard soaring a mile away is one thing. The near inaudible alarm calls from passerines which tell of, say a sparrowhawk at close quarters is something else entirely. Do you give a recall? Do you say "Stay?" Do you hide yourself? Do you approach your bird? Do you freeze on the spot etc? At this point (and it can be a split second's timing) if you get your response wrong to the close proximity of a predator, your bird may flee in panic, and that means it could go 20 miles in 30 minutes' flying time, and you would not have a clue as to which direction it finally went in

The bizarre concept of keeping clipped birds will, in the not too distant future become a thing of the past. It will go like leg chains on parrots went. Hand-rearing (because of the behavioural problems it result in as birds mature) will also eventually go. These things will have to go through the usual learning curve stuff. They will, at first be dismissed, then ridiculed, then taken up by a few who have a healthy questioning approach to a bird's real needs. Then they will become more or less 'normal' while a few die-hards will take their old practices to the grave with themselves. Finally we will regret the vile things we did to birds because we were told by 'experts' "you have to do these things, I've been doing it this way for decades it (sic) it works" etc.. Remember how the 'experts' fought against the US wild bird protection Act? Well, there are plenty of other 'experts' in aviculture who have not a clue about any birds behavioural needs.

Yes, you can 'break a horse' by using the vile, classic rodeo methods, if you are blind or dismissive of the cruelty this method uses. Or you can work with the horse's natural behaviours and simply 'ask' to ride it co-operatively, and then have an utterly different relationship with the horse.

It's much the same with any approach to being with other creatures. And it's down to an understanding through empathy rather than some limp idea of claiming to 'love' the bird, while remaining unaware of its true and often desperate needs. Some pet birds are always going to be kept simply to satisfy the inappropriate 'needs' of the keeper (a child substitute or abused as some object to cuddle for the keeper's perhaps slightly perverted benefit etc). But having a relationship with a bird based on a full understanding that it is a bird is an utterly different and endlessly fascinating, privileged thing to experience.

Article originally posted on the Parrot Society NZ mailing list at ParrotSocietyNZ@groups.msn.com

Last modified: 24 September 2002.