noodles123
Well-known member
- Jul 11, 2018
- 8,145
- 472
- Parrots
- Umbrella Cockatoo- 15? years old..I think?
I've always kept my birds in male/female pairs and never once in over fifty years of bird-keeping has an egg been laid. (Qualify that: my son's lovebirds have laid eggs twice in nine years, but they were sterile and the hens didn't sit). I see no problem in allowing my birds to partake in 'that' part of their lives - I just prevent the arrival of unwanted offspring by not providing nesting materials. I've kept Rosellas, Galahs, Grass Parrots, Red Rumps, Turquoises, Bourke's and Alexandrines in bonded pairs with nary a problem.
Regarding bonding, most of the abovementioned birds were aviary dwellers. The Galahs and Alexes were not, however, and all bonded strongly to me as well as to each other. The Galahs were hand-raised (by me) and the Beaks arrived together at four months of age. I found that growing them up together helped them associate strongly with one another as well as with me. I wanted this, as part of my intention in keeping pairs is to permit each bird to find refuge in another member of its own species. I don't believe for an instant that a human companion alone is enough for a bird. They're social animals and need that avian contact for their mental health.
It's interesting that birds can exist quite amicably in horrendous living conditions where overcrowding and mixing of the sexes occurs, yet people who ever-so-carefully monitor every detail of their pet bird's environment find a pair no longer gets along after years of living peaceably together. I always wonder whether this occurs because of the careful monitoring and not because of any animosity between the birds.
Anyway, that's just my personal opinion. I know others will disagree and that's cool. I'd love to hear more opinions because, after all, that's how we learn, right?
Before I get started, I just want to be clear:
I DO NOT THINK YOU ARE NEGLECTING YOUR BIRDS BY HOUSING THEM TOGETHER LOL. I just wanted to emphasize that--if it works for you, great (no need to fix what isn't broken). I am just saying that many people have not been so fortunate so it is a big gamble. I think you are a fine/good/caring bird-owner and so none of this is a criticism of your "parronting" skills. Just want to make sure that was clear!!!
My bird doesn't really like other birds (she came to me this way)---She can be around them and they interest her, but she is scared of them at times when they fly unexpectedly etc (they make her a bit anxious even though she spent a lot of time in a place with other birds). She prefers people and other animals to birds lol. I get what you mean about them being highly social (and no argument here in terms of captivity being unnatural for such a social creature), but at the end of the day, as long as they have lots of interaction with multiple people/situations etc, I don't think another bird is a MUST for their happiness. I mean, they are designed to do a lot of things that that cannot do in captivity---flying 40+ miles a day for instance. Captivity itself is far from an ideal scenario, but unless a single bird is visibly unhappy, I am not sure that we can assume that their life is lacking (any more than any other captive parrot's) without an avian partner. At the same time, I can see what you mean.
Many people's birds do lay eggs etc, so that is certainly a risk (even though it isn't always a problem). Also, for species inclined to pick one mate for life, a bond to another bird often IS that life-time bond. Instinctively, it is not typical for many species to have a close bond with more than one being (bird or human). Not saying that ALL birds are like this (in fact, cockatoos are an example of a species that can have more than one close bond), BUT many possess this tendency. Even cockatoos will pick a favorite person and exhibit mate-defending behaviors within the right setting.
That having been said, if we are talking about what is natural/their nature, the very things that make mating pairs less desirable within a home-setting are the things that would make them successful parents in the wild (protecting their mate, protecting their nest/territory, bonding closely with one mate, killing young at times, mating frequently to ensure the survival of the species during times of perceived "abundance" (e.g., captivity). SO,my point is, nothing about captivity is natural and sometimes what works in nature actually creates a worse situation in the home (both for the bird and the person). Yes- all birds want to reproduce, but by avoiding the triggers, sometimes it can be less anxiety inducing for both the bird and the human.
I understand wanting to keep things as close to nature as possible, but a captive bird is so far removed from "natural". If the presence of another bird is going to potentially increase aggression and limit socializing opportunities (as a direct result of a disinclination towards humans) then it seems kinder to take the path that allows for the most freedom and socialization (even if it is the less natural). All too often you hear about these cage-bound pairs that only want to be together and do not even want human hands in the cage for feeding. That is due, in part, to human mistakes (I am sure) but it is also instinctual and I would rather avoid that possibility altogether. Then there are the potential health issues, which many members have experienced (heck---even a stimulated single bird can lay eggs, but if there is an opposite-sex parrot of the same species, that risk increases, as does the risk of actual chicks hatching).
The other thing is that young, pre-pubescent birds are not going to exhibit the same behaviors that they do in adulthood, so what seems like a friendly relationship can and often does become sexual and/or aggressive when hormones kick in down the road. In the wild, two birds (even 2 bonded birds) would never have the limited space we provide them within any aviary or cage (a city-block is far too small if we are looking at their range in nature). That, plus hormones, plus instincts, plus the anxiety of captivity alone could lead birds to display sudden aggression---whether or not they are closely monitored by humans. You know what I mean? I haven't ever had it happen to me, but lots of people experience issues with this (some of these people don't care about their birds at all and some monitor their every move--the point is, it happens to all sorts of bird owners--not just the ones who are overly cautious).
I also think that the ones who exist in horrendous conditions are often the "children" of "parronts" who don't care...and so when things go wrong, or when a bird dies (or gets injured by another bird), they are not going to post on a forum or ask what went wrong. Yes, birds have survived unthinkable neglect (as have children) but a neglectful parent (or parront) isn't likely to express concerns about the loss of a bird/problematic incidents, as they are too negligent to even care or notice, let alone take the time to trouble-shoot on the internet. The ones you WILL hear from are the ones who tried to do everything right/ supervised their birds somewhat carefully...I guess what I mean to say is that correlation does not equate causation. I think your observation is a correlation but I wouldn't say that it is the cause of these issues. For the most part, if you hear someone's horror story, it is because they care enough to discuss it---when it comes to the apathetic/neglectful owners out there, you are unlikely to ever hear from them unless A) they realize they were messing up and feel bad that they didn't know better OR, B) because they are worried about a monetary loss relating to breeding/sales etc. That having been said, the majority of tragedies due to neglect/inappropriate housing etc are never discussed publicly due to the very nature of the beast.
Last edited:
