Continued from Page 1In following Dr. Irene Pepperberg's studies in communication using the now famous Alex (Psittacus erithicus erithicus) reveals that the psitticine is capable of conceptualizing, labeling, and communicating their desires. Of course not all parrots are able to respond as well as Alex, but not all of us are able to work with our parrots for close to eight hours a day. Alex is a 'working bird'. For over fifteen years he has been given intimate attention and monitored closely for a given response. For those that have acquired an African grey with the expectation that their bird will become an 'instant Alex' are setting themselves up for great disappointment in the majority of cases. Some greys never speak, some are limited in their ability, and many will speak well but inappropriately. Dr. Pepperberg must conduct her studies without the slightest hint of anthropomorphism or a panel may reject her submission of data. We, on the other hand, may be as anthropomorphic as we please in stating that our parrots are 'in a bad mood', that they 'love' us, or have 'fallen in love' with another of their own species. These projections of feelings onto something inhuman would be considered anthropopathism or being anthropopathic. There, something else to worry about. As if anthropomorphism wasn't bad enough!
I find that the subject of anthropomorphism is brought up in the strangest of topic settings. One that stands out in my mind is the segment included in Steve Martin's video tape series Parrots As Pets. While I found the tapes very informative and humorous I was confused at the segment of anthropomorphism. The tapes, if you have not had the opportunity to view them, are instrumental in teaching your parrot to comply with simple commands, learning tricks using naturally exhibited behaviors, the concept of extrinsic rewarding using a bridge and reward technique, and interjected with humor to make the viewing fun. Then comes this segment on anthropomorphism. What?! It was here that I had to disagree with Steve Martin because he had taken such an adamant stand against the practice. How could anyone that works this closely with parrots in a non-scientific setting come out professionally against anthropomorphism? Personally I could not work with an intellectually equipped species for as long as he has and be of the same opinion. I am scientifically based in my thought from years of medical training, doing lab study, and the like, and do not consider myself of the "moon-beam" variety in dealing with my birds. I treat them as birds, giving them every opportunity to fulfill their potential as birds. They are not children, cousins, husbands or wives, or anything else in the human sense. They are birds, wild and different from me in every aspect of their being, but at the same time they are sentient, intelligent, trusting, and amusing. Likened to a friend, they are there for us and this is why we keep them. And in keeping them our responsibility to them is great.
Take a moment to consider what the life of our parrots would be like if we did not exhibit one little hint of anthropomorphism. Through an anthropomorphic view our parrots are well cared for and respected. Before the societies of cruelty prevention for animals were in place, being set up in the last half of the last century, animals were treated as less than the least. They were here to serve man after all. It was not beyond common practice to beat a dog to death or work a horse until it literally dropped in the street from exhaustion and poor care. Parrots have (and in some cases still do) have their share of horror stories. We have all heard of parrots banished to some dark and filthy existence in basements, a flock mentality isolated from interaction and kept alone until insanity sets in destroying a potentially viable companion. Without an anthropomorphic slant, parrots would be viewed as livestock. Many bird fairs and shows still have the 'livestock vendors' , the uninformed and seedy-looking characters that have a filthy parrot in a small cage telling potential buyers that "all it needs is to be shown who's boss and it'll be a great pet." I've seen first hand the "show it who's boss" technique. I never want to see it again.
When I was a mere slip of a girl living in San Diego, California I worked in a pet store. It was one of those chain-stores that show up in the shopping malls so that parents can be dragged in there by their children who want everything they see. I've seen many poor decisions made by adults through the insistence of a child. I was responsible for the care of all of the animals in this store and the ones that struck fear through my very heart were the parrots. This was in 1975 and being so close to the border of Mexico all of our birds were imported as wild caught. "Broncos" was the term I learned that was used for these nasty, little specimens. The dealer that would bring in these birds to sell to the store was a man of dubious character. There was nothing inherently human about this individual in the least respect. He was mean, uncaring, dirty, and foul. He brought in an amazon to sell and I was present as I was attending to my little charges in the bird room. The bird was held in a burlap bag, screaming and growling to defend itself against this man, when the man reached into the bag and hauled the bird out by its feet. Immediately he began to swing the bird in large circles before the bird had a chance to bite him. He told the owner of the store that this will make the bird dizzy and he won't be able to bite. He stopped swinging the bird and the bird sat docile by its held feet. "This is how you tame a wild parrot", the man told us. As young as I was at the time I knew in my heart that this man was dead wrong in his approach in dealing with animals of any species. If this man had one anthropomorphic bone in his body that poor bird would not have had to endure such treatment. It relates directly to the 'livestock mentality'.
We are just beginning to scratch the tip of the iceberg in understanding the parrots that we are sharing our lives with. So much has been learned in the past decade in understanding the psitticine mind. The techniques used in dealing with parrots are being examined by all of those involved. Breeders are now understanding that the effects of constantly taking young from the nest for hand-rearing may be adversely affecting their hens. It is slowly becoming common practice to allow the pair to successfully raise a clutch of their own occasionally. The hens react with what we can only call sadness to the constant abduction of their young and this places great stress on a mating pair. It is about time that we look at the results of our actions in breeding parrots and treat them with the respect that they deserve. They should be allowed to succeed as nature has intended in producing and rearing young. With an anthropomorphic slant we are able to comprehend these ideas.
Anthropomorphism should not be feared. The scientific community will take care of that end of it. I'm not advocating that parrots be treated as Homo sapiens simply because they are not of that particular species. Treat them for what they are, understanding that there is more to them that lies under the superficial feathering, the ominous beak, and their gift of gab. Unless you are involved in hard science and data compilation you may be as anthropomorphic as you wish, but use good sense so that the pet bird community does not garner the reputation of being a bunch of "moon-beam" and "puffy the parrot" lunatics that treat their parrots as if they should be on the ballot in the next congressional election. Love them, treasure them, and respect them. And when they tell you "I love you", believe them. It's probably true.
To Contact Donna Hefton About Donna Hefton
| Top | Back |
 NetPets® Main Page |  The Bird Center |