What's your opinion on that?

[lotosha]

I saw a TV show where ornithologist said that CAG in the wild get married in a very young age and live with their partners for long time. It was told that it is cruel to have only one African Grey and that they are lonely and unhappy. The ornithologist suggested that they start talking because of their unhappiness.
What do you think about this statement?

 

[antoinette]

I totally disagree with that statement

Mishka has never had a companion bird, he gets an abundance of love and attention.

If that is the case.......

Then heaven forbid Mishka must be the most unhappiest CAG on this planet.

 

[Betrisher]

Because we're all bird lovers, we try to be honest about our fids and admit our shortcomings. But I think this guy's point of view is nothing more than that: a point of view. The only way he could know for sure whether African Greys are miserable outside a pair bond is to ask one! Well, duh!

The other thing is that we all watch our birds like the proverbial hawks. We know when they're miserable or ill. At times like that, we act to improve things and often turn ourselves inside out to do what's necessary. It's one thing to study birds as a science and quite another to study them as a companion. I've done both and I think the scientist here is leaving a *lot* of variables out of his observations. It might be an interesting subject for the telly, but there's a lot more that goes into a) a pair bond and b) the bond between bird and owner that could be discussed.

So, in a nutshell: 'Nah! I disagree!'

 

[antoinette]

Because we're all bird lovers, we try to be honest about our fids and admit our shortcomings. But I think this guy's point of view is nothing more than that: a point of view. The only way he could know for sure whether African Greys are miserable outside a pair bond is to ask one! Well, duh!

The other thing is that we all watch our birds like the proverbial hawks. We know when they're miserable or ill. At times like that, we act to improve things and often turn ourselves inside out to do what's necessary. It's one thing to study birds as a science and quite another to study them as a companion. I've done both and I think the scientist here is leaving a *lot* of variables out of his observations. It might be an interesting subject for the telly, but there's a lot more that goes into a) a pair bond and b) the bond between bird and owner that could be discussed.

So, in a nutshell: 'Nah! I disagree!'

Perhaps he should ask Mishka face to face

 

[lotosha]

Perhaps he should ask Mishka face to face

I'm afraid that he'll make his famous ''puppie speach'' to her, so she'll make wrong conclusions again.lol

 

[antoinette]

Perhaps he should ask Mishka face to face

I'm afraid that he'll make his famous ''puppie speach'' to her, so she'll make wrong conclusions again.lol

That is what Mishka should tell them it is "puppie speach"

 

[Betrisher]

The scientist's bum is sore - oh shame!
He must go to the hospital because he poopied!

 

[Pajarita]

I agree 100%. I also like to believe that what he said is tripe but, if you research how they live in the wild and are honest about what you find, you'll have to agree with him. They are meant to have a mate chosen by them and not a human they got because the human chose him/her. We love them and take as good a care as we can of them but we can't replace a bird mate no matter how dedicated we are, how much time/money/love we put into it. We are not birds. we can't forage, perch or fly with them, we can't really allopreen, we can't have sex or babies with them, etc. etc. Only another bird can.

And it is true that only birds are the best talkers. It stands to reason.... why would a bird make the effort to learn human language when he can communicate perfectly well in his own language with another bird without making any effort whatsoever? They learn because they need to belong and we are the only ones there. And I've seen it happen the other way in my birdroom. Birds that were only birds which spoke a lot gradually stopped and only say a few things here and there whereas, when they first came, they had huge vocabularies. There are exceptions to every rule but it's pretty much like he says.

 

[lotosha]

Now another question. Let's say I am going to buy another AG, If I have a year old girl is it better to buy her a boy or girl companion? And is it better to have a chick or to get a grown bird?
Thanks.

 

[riaria]

I agree 100%. I also like to believe that what he said is tripe but, if you research how they live in the wild and are honest about what you find, you'll have to agree with him. They are meant to have a mate chosen by them and not a human they got because the human chose him/her. We love them and take as good a care as we can of them but we can't replace a bird mate no matter how dedicated we are, how much time/money/love we put into it. We are not birds. we can't forage, perch or fly with them, we can't really allopreen, we can't have sex or babies with them, etc. etc. Only another bird can.

And it is true that only birds are the best talkers. It stands to reason.... why would a bird make the effort to learn human language when he can communicate perfectly well in his own language with another bird without making any effort whatsoever? They learn because they need to belong and we are the only ones there. And I've seen it happen the other way in my birdroom. Birds that were only birds which spoke a lot gradually stopped and only say a few things here and there whereas, when they first came, they had huge vocabularies. There are exceptions to every rule but it's pretty much like he says.

I agree. Human imprinted birds are understandably confused when it comes to viewing humans as mates, but that's a relationship that tends to come with a lot of issues... And most human imprinted birds do benefit from having other birds around them, even if they're still confused about their own identity. You can't force someone to have more than one bird, because there is so much that comes with having several parrots that it might not work out very well. But as a general rule, with few exceptions, I don't think parrots should be only birds. Even if they can't interact physically, they still interact vocally and visually.

Of course a bird can be happy even if it's an only bird. Just like us humans can be happy even if we're single, or if we're confined to a wheelchair, etc. But I feel that it should be enough that (many of) our parrots live indoors, probably spend time in a cage, adapting to our lives. We don't have to force them to live without other birds, too

(We only have one Grey in our family, and even though she spends time with the other birds and is very vocally interactive with them, I feel guilty for letting her be the only Grey. The other two doesn't seem to have that same need for socialising. I wonder if it's a Grey thing, because they tend to live in one-species-only flocks?)

That said, there are lots of birds that are good talkers even though they have lots of birdie friends - I think they're clever enough to find it amusing to imitate and get reactions out of people, and to communicate with them

And, most importantly, again, if someone doesn't want another bird and can't cope with another, then forcing them would probably not be in the best interests for their first bird... In some countries it's illegal to keep only one parrot. And that's not such a bad idea, after all.

 

[lotosha]

Thanks everyone for your opinion. I think I'll maybe start looking for another AG.