Parrot Hierarchy of needs

[Freedomoflight]

This is a post I wrote about a year ago on a parrot message board, in regards to a posters question about parrots and dependency, the need for. Their argument was that parrots are naturally dependent on their flock, so it would only be natural that a bird is more then clingy to his/her human, and shouldn't we baby them like that, since its natural? This was my response that I am cleaning up for an article:


OK here it is. Bare with me as this is all pure speculation/observation on my part and I am going to be jumping around alot, K?

Have you ever heard of Maslows Hiercharcy of Needs? The theory is that once your basic needs are fulfilled- shelter, food, security- you can move 'up the ladder' and continue to fillfull lesser needs- needs that you do not need for basic survival. Needs like self esteem, positive interaction with peers. The highest need is self fulfillment- self awareness. It is estimated that very few, if any, human beings ever fulfill this need because we are continually moving up and down the hierarchy.

True parrot flock dynamics are instinctual, and based on survival. Parrots need other parrots. They need them for security- they warn each other of predators. They need each other for socialization- verbal and physical, like grooming. They need a flock so they can pick a mate and continue the circle of life.

In a cage a parrot has everything given to him. Food in a bowl eliminates the 4-9 hours a day your bird would be foraging. Toys and huts replace time the bird would spend seeking shelter and things to play with. A clean water dish eliminates hours of flying to find a fresh water source.
So whats left? Socialization of course! Verbal- isn't it fun to scream?! And physical- preen me, I itch. And your bird has 15+ hours a day to long for it, because everything else has been handed to him.

Hence the need for independence. Hence the difference between true parrot flock dynamics and human flock dynamics. In the wild, a parrot is always with another bird- in a 'flock'. At home, your bird may be around you, your dog ,your cat, your goldfish- but never have those true parrot flock dynamics.

Now- back to our handy-dandy hierarchy of needs.

This diagram is based on a humans hierarchy of needs- and is a bit more complicated then needs be, IMO. But it illustrates what I am going to be talking about well.



OK so picture a parrot. In the wild your parrot has to work to fulfill his physiological needs each day. Thats an all day job. Once those needs are fulfilled, he/she needs to find a safe place to roost for the night, and/or a safe nesting cavity to raise babies. That fulfills safety needs. Your bird has now moved up 2 places on the pyramid.
The flock dynamic, and your birds mate would most likely fulfill the love/belonging need (I do not want to get into these aspects too much because otherwise its going to lead into a lot of guesswork/anthromorphization/illogical reasoning)
Your bird is almost to self fulfillment. In humans, sell fulfillment is the ULTIMATE. We want for nothing, have everything, have no issues. I hesitate to move a bird to the esteem rung, simply because can birds have an esteem need in the sense humans do? You decide.
Either way you look at it- your bird in the wild is pretty far up in the hierarchy just by fulfilling basic needs on a daily basis. Higher up then some humans will ever get, for that matter.

Now- take a captive bird.
Physiological needs- handed to them. Why the need to fulfill if they are already there? Food, check. Water, check. Sleep, check. Clean cage, check.

Safety needs- fulfilled. A cage in an area away from natural dangers.

This leaves us at the love/belonging need.

OK so this is where dependency and the hierarchy theory ties in, for me at least. You can't want what you never missed, or in this case didn't acknowledge you already had- in this case physiological and safety needs. So it makes logical sense, if you are looking at the hierarchy- that most parrots start out trying to fulfill the love/belonging need. Whether or not it is fulfilled is based on the interaction between human and parrot.
I think that, IMHO, once the love/belonging need is fulfilled, the bird can move up the hierarchy to what we would view as fulfillment- in this case not having to be Dependant upon a human for everything. IE playing in the cage while the human is away, participating in foraging and natural preening activities, engaging in regular sleeping patterns, etc.

To be stuck in the dependent stage, would to be stuck on trying to fulfill one of the hierarchy needs. In most birds cases, its the love/belonging. Where do i fit in, in this human flock? Are they going to take me out today?

Now- interesting concept here. Compare the behaviors of a wild bird with behaviors of a captive birds, and their place on the hierarchy. A captive bird, as I said, i believed would be on self atualization portion of the pyramid, having fulfilled all other needs on a daily basis. Wild birds do not pluck- they do not bite (biting is a captive bird behavior, wild birds do not bite other then to warn of danger- they do not inflict harm with their beaks with the intent to hurt) and they certainly do not have screaming issues! they play, they fly, they make nests and have chicks.
Consider the captive bird. The captive bird is, from my perspective, usually stuck on the love/belonging part of the hierarchy. It is not uncommon to hear of, or even live with a bird that has biting, screaming, plucking/self mutilating issues. A bird that is clipped, that does not have chicks, and participate in other natural activities.

So where does this leave us?

Seems to me the bird that has more freedom- ie socialization within flock dynamics, be it human or bird, is taught to forage, engage in natural activities such as bathing, preening, playing with toys- is one to be happier because they can have lives outside their human. Being independant is not a bad thing- its being dependent that can turn into damaging.

[Lisa B]

Very good article Emily! thank you for sharing it!

[SDavid]

Interesting theory. But I think it's built on a very uncertain assumption. And that is that the captive parrot starts at the love/belonging stage. To put them there we would have to be 100% certain that the previous needs are in fact being fulfilled. Not just from our human point of view.

For instance, lets look at "safety." To us it seems that a cage is a safe and secure environment. So we would tend to assume that the bird feels this way as well. But, don't birds feel most secure in the ability to escape from danger or any threat? It's the only defense they've ever evolved. And I believe they can miss it because it is instinctual. If instinct tell them to do a behavior (any behavior) and they are denied it problems will and have developed. Ease of escape is the reason they can land and eat close to their predators. They know they can fly up and out of harms way. When they hear a strange noise, they take off immediately. Birds on our fingers do this as well.

Now take a caged bird. With children running around, dogs, cats, etc. Kitchen fumes, loud noises, and many other disturbances in our homes. Aren't they in fact trapped and do they feel stressed because of it? They have to sit there and take all of it. Sure they may not be the same dangers as in the wild but your bird might want to leave just the same. Some get so stressed that they begin to self-mutilate. This is one case scenario of course but a realistic one I think.

Even in the case of physiological needs. We are denying them the wearing down of their beaks and nails that they would get from foraging. Not to mention the exercise. So, by handing them food we are taking something away as well...mental stimulation and physical health.

I know your aticle is subjective. I'm just bringing up some things that came to mind. It would be great if we could know if they are truly fulfilled in some aspect or another but I don't think we can. I think part of the fulfillment for parrots is working for what they have not just "having" it. Work for birds = happiness. Just like the birds in our backyard...always busy. I do though agree with the last part of your article about birds being independent.

[swanwillow]

I like it..

now, just to talk in the topic, I agree with freedom, and not Sdavid. Actually, everything SDavid outlined goes WITH and not AGAINST the pyramid.

She's not saying they start there, but that they get stuck there for lack of any other level TO be in. Yes, they can move into the security, since as you outlined, there are issues with caged bird life that will stress out a bird. But, during the day (most kids go to school, dogs are let out, things settle out for 8 hours/day) they go back to the trying to fulfill the love/belonging... By doing this, they may be overpreening (they have noone else to preen during the lonesome hours) plucking, destroying toys, so on and so forth.

And even all of the business of a normal household-that fulfills the needs that they have for flock-flocks of birds ARE loud, busy, banging, clanging is just the sounds THEIR flocks make. Not stressfull. The stress comes when we walk out the door, leaving them behind-in the wild, thats what other birds in a flock do to injured members.. they are left behind, as they would attract predation to the whole entity of the flock. More or less, your dead anyway.

I seriously doubt many birds pluck/mutilate because of a busy house, I think they pluck because of lack of the love/belonging area of the pyramid that they are stuck in like a revolving door. Day in, day out, they are there, with no way to get out of it.

I like that article, I want to print it out and hand it around!!!

[Freedomoflight]

I am enjoying that this is bringing up some interesting points for discussion!

SwanWillow, feel free to print it out and hand it out. Just give credit to Emily, please!

[LyndaM]

Ultimately one has to ask whether any other species can successfully fulfill any aspect of the triangle for another, which, if you believe that it can't, makes having a captive bird immoral because we are knowingly depriving them of their fundamental right to self-actualization. Sometimes I wonder if the bond a bird feels for its owner is the same one that a captive human develops with, say, a kidnapper (Patty Hearst syndrome). It is simply the nature of all conscious/sapient beings to form bonds, and the owner provides the only choice. But, it wouldn't be the one the bird would choose if it were free and uncorrupted by human interference.

Just some late-night thoughts...I could be way off with this musing...

[SDavid]

LyndaM, excellent points. I struggle with that myself and you put it into words very well.

Swanwillow,

"She's not saying they start there, but that they get stuck there for lack of any other level TO be in."

I do understand that but it is a "hierarchy" so to get there one has to "compleat" the other levels so to speak. Lets just say we place a bird at that point. To do this the other levels must be satisfied, right? Or the bird doesn't move up. I'm saying that I don't think we can be sure that they (captive birds) really get to that level (to get stuck there) because we can't verify that the lower levels are truly fulfilled for them to move on. How could we? From your post you think that fulfillment in the other levels can happen. I'm saying we don't know.


"all of the business of a normal household-that fulfills the needs that they have for flock."

To a point, as birds do chatter and show signs of happiness when the house is "alive." But I still don't know how you can be so sure that the fulfullment takes place. I take LyndaM's position on that issue-that we simply aren't certain....."Ultimately one has to ask whether any other species can successfully fulfill any aspect of the triangle for another."

"I seriously doubt many birds pluck/mutilate because of a busy house,..."

I never said "busy." To you, your house is just "busy" because you understand the origin and meaning of the noises. My point is that there are things in a normal house that can and do at times bother a bird and the bird can't get away from them if or when it want's to. Can our birds shut the TV off when they are tired of listening? Can they tell our kids or dogs to shut up so they can doze off? Can they say to you "easy on the cleaning product, it bothes my eyes"? Can they ask you "what's that noise coming from the other room it's really making me scared?" etc, etc. Or, can they simply go somewhere else?

I've read many articles about some known causes of pucking (for certain caged birds). Some factors off the top of my head have been doors slamming, loud teenagers running up and down stairs, bad cage placement, shouting matches between people. A caged bird that is constantly being shaken-up or stressed by certain (mysterious to the bird) goings-on in the home has been known to have problems be it plucking or some other manifestation. It's not my opinion. I've read these articles. To me it's simply not a valid equation that "flock ruckus = human household noise." Not from the birds point of view IMO.

And, I'm not saying that normal events in our house bother them "all of the time." BUT they can't get away from any of them if and when they want to. Add to that the events that surprise and scare them and you have a possibly stressed out bird. No matter how many times I take out the vaccum cleaner, it scares the heck out of my TAG. It should be normal to her by now but I'm sure she'd fly over to the other side of the room in a panic if she wasn't in her cage.

[LyndaM]

Originally Posted by SDavid

LyndaM, excellent points. I struggle with that myself and you put it into words very well.

Thank you SDavid, I myself have 2 birds, so I hear you on the struggle; it's probably something all of us bird people think about in one way or another. This is a very interesting conversation, by the way; I'm enjoying this thread!

Another point would be that unless you have provided a mate that the bird accepts, it cannot ever move to even the second level because it's sexuality cannot be fulfilled by a human even if the bird is "bonded" to that human. I know that people believe that they are substitute mates for their birds, but isn't that as frustrating for the bird, anthropomorphically speaking, as living in a sexless marriage would be for us?

"It's not my opinion. I've read these articles. To me it's simply not a valid equation that "flock ruckus = human household noise."

Again, I agree with you SDAvid, that in our human arrogance, we often compare apples to oranges. (Not accusing anyone here of being arrogant! It's part of the human condition -- me included!).

[swanwillow]

I had a reply typed out, but UGH, off to the la-la land of disappearance. I'll write back later with something I think.

[LyndaM]

Swanwillow, is that an eclectus in your signature? It looks beautiful! Also, I see you are a parrotlet breeder -- do you breed lucidas? I have a wonderful green 10 month old pacific male for whom I might like a lucida female one day, not for breeding, just for companionship (and to fulfill the physiological aspect of the heirarchy)