# Ethics / cruelty in keeping caged birds?



## fsendel (May 14, 2011)

Hi all, 

I came across thus article: 

http://www.peta.org/issues/companion-animals/caging-birds.aspx

It made me feel kinda bad... I'd love to hear your thoughts.


----------



## Ghosth (Jun 25, 2012)

First off I'm not a big Peta Fan. Not saying they haven't done some good, but I think they have done equal amounts of harm. 

"Many people buy birds on impulse and don't have a clue how much time, money, and energy is needed to care for them on a daily basis. Birds are as messy and destructive as puppies—something irresponsible breeders and retailers often won't explain to customers. "

True enough, but then many people buy kittens, puppies, fish, turtles, snakes, and everything else and do the same. The simple fact is those creatures exist because of us. I doubt many of us have wild tiels direct from Aus that were living in the wild and trapped. 

No our birds were bred, lovingly fed the best we could, given all they need to make big pretty healthy babies. And those babys were socialized and sent out into the world.
Is it fair to condemn all birds because some humans don't recognise the responsibility when they buy one?

Should you have to take a bird quiz, have a licence to buy one? And would that really change anything?

Life is what it is, people as a whole change but very very very slowly.

Peta could probably accuse half the people on this forum of neglect in one form or another. But for the most part our birds live long, healthy, happy lives. Isn't that what is important?


----------



## Oni (Feb 20, 2012)

I've heard this all before when I used to keep reptiles  The truth is that ANY animal species can be bought on impulse, out grown, incorrectly kept etc etc...it's not unique to any specific one.

The more popular an animal becomes as a pet the more there is breeding for specific colours for eg. guppies (fish), bearded dragons, leopard geckos, corn snakes, budgies, cockatiels. These animals all represent a small handful of the most commonly kept pets where their popularity has resulted in MANY different colours/morphs being selectively bred by breeders. These particular animals are MANY generations removed from their wild counterparts. They lack some of the natural instinct to be able to survive in the wild and their unusual colours and most often displacement from the 'natural habitat' mean they have very little to no chance of ever surviving outside of captivity. Their whole existence is to be a pet - and no they don't have any choice in the matter but that's a whole different issue about people playing God.

Animals of all varieties ARE still smuggled but responsible countries try to stop or at least minimize it. Places like Australia banned exporting wildlife ages ago...so again...even your wild coloured cockatiels or bearded dragon is HIGHLY unlikely to have had a wild relative for many many MANY generations.

I think as long as there are people there will be good and bad pet owners. There will be people who can fake it for a license but don't put it into practice. There will be people who become hoarders, become complacent, get bored of their pet etc. Unless you wanted the sci-fi kind of world where there are spy cameras in your house linked directly to secret services and every single item of your life is monitored and controlled you will never be able to stop it.

I agree that if there is a known problem (such as with unwanted Iguanas in shelters) then rehome rather than breed....but where there is demand then there is business.

I think we should all just do the best we can for our pets, encourage others in a non confrontational way and keep an eye out for anything we NEED to report. 

*gets off soap box*


----------



## Oni (Feb 20, 2012)

Just wanted to add that I also believe if your animal is naturally designed to do something you should not change it as it will undoubtedly have a negative effect on the animals well being. For example, birds fly - so let them out of the cage to fly! Dogs are pack animals that patrol daily - so don't leave them alone all day and make sure to take them for regular walks!


----------



## Loopy Lou (Jul 26, 2012)

It would be decidedly more cruel if every single one of us agreed with this and opted to let our tiels go free outside.

Or any other animal that is no longer equipped for it.


----------



## eduardo (Jan 27, 2012)

Personally, I think my tiels are having a blast in my home Can't get them off my hands and shoulders


----------



## birdsoo (Jul 4, 2012)

The kind of thought that pets are unhappy, they should have their "freedom" etc and we should let them free is naive, romantic and ignorant of the facts.

I am too weary of these kind of claims to add anything else


----------



## hysteriauk (Jun 24, 2012)

I think most bird owners are wise enough to know if their bird is unhappy they will go that extra mile to find out what the matter is and help it and most owners are sensible enough to allow their bird plenty of freedom from the cage and have a sensible diet and are very well cared for .

Peta do like to dramatize things but I guess that comes from having most of hollywood on it's books


----------



## lethalfire (Aug 29, 2012)

Yep we are cruel horrible horrible people.......we are so cruel that we do research upon research of what is best for our tiels.....we bake food when some of us won't even bake for ourselves, just so they can have the best (hhhmmm no searching and possibly going hungry because they can't find food for our fids, yep cruel) we spend tons of money on toys so that they can shred, destroy, be entertained just for their enjoyment so that once they are destroyed we can go spend MORE money for them to do it all over again (yep so cruel that they can't search and search for bark oh wait that's right they're too busy searching for food outside who has time to play? yep we are sooo cruel.) We are constantly wiping up, vacuuming up poop and feathers because we let them out of the cage and explore and roam around and hang with us, where mind you we also provide them with warmth, shelter, free of predators, a place out if the wind and rain (yep we're soo cruel) we give them warm mists or showers to help them take care of their feathers. Yep we're cruel.
Sorry I just don't see it. Sadly there are those that don't take care of their pets those people don't deserve them. But for those who DO and love them, yep lets make THEM feel guilty because guess what, do you REALLY think the people who aren't taking proper care of their pets are going to feel bad or guilty?


----------



## Jony N Me (Sep 20, 2012)

I am at work so i can’t get on your link to read as my work blocks certain sites... i saw one important word though on your post... PETA.... ( so i CANT WAIT to read this article when i get home)

i agree with Ghosth. i am definitely not a Peta fan. While i do know they have done good, i personally believe they are extremists and have done equal or greater harm than good at times. That is just my opinion though, no disrespect to anyone if they think otherwise. 

**I have to share this story though , I can’t help myself***
I am a VERY calm person by nature BUT I actually had it out with a member in public before. Me and my children were walking minding our own business one day a while back… and we passed PETA advocates protesting something in the shopping center. One tried to give me a pamphlet and I kindly declined. They had posters they were holding out for everyone to see. ( which is fine, freedom of speech whatever) I told my youngest not to look keep walking ( didn’t want him to be confused) I kid you not since I wouldn’t take a pamphlet…some lady came up to my son opened the pamphlet and showed him a horrible picture trying to get him to take the pamphlet….( he was 6!!!!!) WOOOOOAAAAHHHHHHH…….YEAH needless to say I flipped out and I still think the lady is missing part of her fanny, because I nearly chewed it off with words. : / it got ugly. Who does that???? While I don’t hold PETA liable for one stupid member acting foolish… it did leave and even more bitter taste in my mouth for that organization 

OK haha thanks for listening to my story, carry on


----------



## CookieTiel (Feb 6, 2012)

Peta ticks me off sometimes. It's interesting that some people make such a big fuss about caged birds, and yet they forget that cats and dogs also lose part of their freedom once they become a house pet. Would a bird be happier in the wild or at home? I believe in the wild, but domesticated birds have no condition to live in the wild and so we can't let them go. Would cats and dogs be happier in the wild or at home? I believe they would also be happier in the wild, because they are animals and are made to live free, but we also can't let them go because it would be cruel. 

It annoys me that some people believe that dogs and cats are house pets, and birds are not. Cats and dogs have been domesticated for so long that today we tend to forget that they once belonged in the wild. So I think it is hypocritical to say that we cant own birds, but yet we can own a dog. Animals are animals, period. If it is wrong to own one species, it is wrong to own all species. 

And birds that are owned by responsible people have pretty good lives, and live under much better conditions than in the wild. Many birds are very happy living with humans and have the freedom to do many things.


----------



## Oni (Feb 20, 2012)

I don't think we have much dealings with PETA being in the UK and all but I do seem to remember that the general sway of the whole organization is that they think keeping any pet/companion is wrong.

I'm not sure of their opinion of working animals - obviously they aren't wild and free either (Read: police/army/farm horses, hunting dogs/guard dogs/rescue dogs/drug & bomb detector dogs/guide dogs and hearing dogs, hunting birds etc  which all need to be kept, trained and bonded with in order to perform well in their roles)


----------



## Loopy Lou (Jul 26, 2012)

This made me think of something i learned at college about an animal activist group who released some "poor little captive mink" into the wild.

Where they promptly started wreaking havoc on our eco system, eating the animals, destroying nests and generally being a nuisance.

I'm all for animals but i think that sometimes these animal rights groups lack common sense.


----------



## nassrah (Feb 27, 2012)

I just want to say that I think youre all right,nobody is ever going to make me feel guilty about pampering and loving my birds to bits.I cannot agree more with all of you.To me,PETA should stick to really important matters,like baby seals being killed,fur coats being worn,whale fishing ,cruelty to cattle,horses and poultry,bird mills,and,most of all,lab experiments using animals.PETA Leave our beloved babies alone !!!


----------



## roxy culver (May 27, 2010)

PETA doesn't seem to understand that since birds, dogs, cats, etc have been domesticated for centuries in some cases that they no longer have the instinct to survive in the wild. I deal with stray dogs ALL THE TIME volunteering. When found, over half of them are skin and bones, starving. They don't have the training (from parents, who in the wild would show them how to care for themselves) and they slowly starve to death. Our birds would never make it in the wild and that's something they don't seem to understand.

I agree, they need to stick to the important issues.


----------



## nassrah (Feb 27, 2012)

Thank you roxy culver,I appreciate that Teresa X x


----------



## CookieTiel (Feb 6, 2012)

Yes, I agree. Our birdies would never make it in the wild. I also think PETA needs to be realistic about things. Unfortunately nasty and cruel petshops will never cease to exist, and there will always be irresponsible bird owners. I think it's great there there are responsible owners such as people from this site, who take care of their birdies as if they were their own children. So, PETA needs to understand that there are responsible bird owners, and that trying to ban bird ownership just doesn't work. You have to educate people on how to properly care for them.

I read an article somewhere that PETA employees bring their cats and dogs to work with them, so I think they are for animal ownership...(but apparently only cats and dogs?)


----------



## tielfan (Aug 31, 2008)

PETA is in no position to lecture anybody about ethics, since they kill more than 95% of the animals they "rescue". http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

The Washington Post disputes the figures on that website but still confirms that PETA euthanizes most of the animals they take in. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...are-they-real/2012/02/27/gIQAZdR2dR_blog.html

PETA's agenda is to take away our rights to use animals in any way, including keeping them as pampered pets. It's safe to consider anything they write as propaganda that's designed to make you feel bad about pet ownership. It's one-sided for sure, and I wouldn't just assume that they're truthful.


----------



## cknauf (Aug 27, 2012)

When reading, you always have to consider the source. What's PETA's agenda? That piece is not an unbiased account of birdkeeping, it is a piece specifically designed to bolster an existing belief.

Any captive-raised bird isn't going to have the instincts or skills to survive in the wild. Being in a domestic setting changes a species--there was an interesting piece I read about how most quail hens refuse to incubate their eggs, because quail eggs have been incubator-hatched for so many generations that the impulse has disappeared. I've read many places that cockatiels are practically considered domesticated. Whatever PETA chooses to believe, our feathery friends would not be happier flitting about Australia--they'd be dead.


----------



## fsendel (May 14, 2011)

Wow! Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this. Makes me feel a lot better .


----------



## Dizzy (Oct 5, 2011)

tielfan said:


> PETA is in no position to lecture anybody about ethics, since they kill more than 95% of the animals they "rescue". http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
> 
> The Washington Post disputes the figures on that website but still confirms that PETA euthanizes most of the animals they take in. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...are-they-real/2012/02/27/gIQAZdR2dR_blog.html
> 
> PETA's agenda is to take away our rights to use animals in any way, including keeping them as pampered pets. It's safe to consider anything they write as propaganda that's designed to make you feel bad about pet ownership. It's one-sided for sure, and I wouldn't just assume that they're truthful.


Actually came in to say something along those lines. Many people forget (or don't know) that PETA is literally a terrorist group.


----------



## moonchild (Jul 29, 2012)

PETA aside, I do think there are ethical concerns with keeping birds captive...of course, this goes for all pets. If given improper care, it's cruel. Far too many (ignorant or uncaring) people keep them in too-small cages, don't give them the attention they need or the proper diet. I think a license should be required to keep larger parrots such as macaws or cockatoos...or at least a certification via an educational course. Birds are not for everyone, especially not those birds. For cockatiels, I don't believe they are hard to care for, but I know there are many out there living miserable lives. The fact that we spoil our babies doesn't negate the suffering of the less fortunate ones. I wish there was a solution to these problems.


----------



## ArachnidsPlease (Oct 6, 2012)

Dizzy said:


> Actually came in to say something along those lines. Many people forget (or don't know) that PETA is literally a terrorist group.


whoa I think calling them a terrorist group is a bit far lol. Growing up I was really independent, so I went about learning things on my own rather than following the traditional ideals my family had (ie eating meat, hunting, etc) and Peta is one of the reasons I became a vegetarian 6 years ago. They are very extreme, yes, and its gotten to the point to where when petas name is mentioned the whole thing becomes a joke. they also contradicte themselves a lot. But they did open my eyes to a lot of the animal abuse and industries going on in the world. After a while I learned the difference between what was really going on and the extremity Peta put on it. but they were my stepping stone. you can probably spot my old Peta poster behind my picture of grayson that states "I am not a nugget" (ironic I know haha). to my point:
Peta is extreme. They say a lot of stupid things, but they do a lot for animals. Most people probably wouldn't know about Canada's seal clubbing if not for them. the caged birds topic falls into their extreme portion, while fur industries fall into their legitimate importance portion. I simply can't release my bird into the wild because he WILL die. he enjoys his spoiled life here anyways. Dont take everything Peta says to heart, you never know with them  /end of ridiculously long post


----------



## nassrah (Feb 27, 2012)

Arachnidsplease I do agree with you,and yes,thanks to PETA,I became aware of a lot of cruelty to animals going on in the world ,and thats why I wouldnt call them terrorists either,even not always agreeing with anything they state or do x


----------



## tielfan (Aug 31, 2008)

PETA was classified as a terrorist threat (at least temporarily) by the USDA: http://www.treehugger.com/corporate...ersite+(Treehugger)&utm_content=Google+Reader

This site says that PETA was subsequently removed from the terrorist list: http://www.examiner.com/article/usd...st-threat-list-green-is-no-longer-the-new-red However this seems to be the only site reporting the removal and lots of sites reported the addition to the list, so I'm not sure that it's accurate. 

PETA also has links to terrorists and terrorist organizations and approves of illegal activity to "liberate" animals that they consider to be oppressed. The liberation generally consists of turning the animals loose without consideration of their future survival in an unfamiliar environment. 

http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/o/21-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals
http://voices.yahoo.com/animal-rights-movement-gone-wrong-petas-terror-connections-207202.html?cat=9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatment_of_Animals


----------



## ArachnidsPlease (Oct 6, 2012)

I do not classify them as a terrorist group because they are not harming anyone and they do not target people to kill. They support ALF who rescues animals and then destroys the lab once all the animals are rescued, but even ALF schedules these raids to make sure the facility is completely clear of any human activity or people in general. PETA is not out to kill and hurt people, they're out to show the world the abuse that goes on in the world and a lot of times uses the most ridiculous ways to get their point across. You want a terrorist group, look at the ones who crashed into the twin towers. Their main point is to kill, peta is no where near killing. They don't threaten the united states.


----------



## bjknight93 (Nov 13, 2011)

I don't know..to think that they kill that many animals "because there would be no homes for them" is not someone I would ever look up to. 

Like if they were predominately a bird rescue, rather than dogs and cats..and they received Allie. She'd be gone in a heartbeat because noone wants a messed up animal of any kind. And that is so untrue. I find it hard to believe that 95% of the animals they receive have an issue that warrants euthanization. And they also state that they euthanize because the owners who *relinquish* the animal into their care WANT them to. Anyone who is not completely ignorant knows that once an animal is relinquished into someone else's care, the previous owner has no say. So all those cases where the ex-owner requested euthanization is a load of crap. When it becomes PETA's animal, they don't have to do anything anyone tells them.

I don't like them. Never have, never will. Period. They are extreme and don't pay attention to what matters and you have to practice what you preach. Which apparently, they have forgotten the concept of.


----------



## ArachnidsPlease (Oct 6, 2012)

bjknight93 said:


> I don't know..to think that they kill that many animals "because there would be no homes for them" is not someone I would ever look up to.
> 
> Like if they were predominately a bird rescue, rather than dogs and cats..and they received Allie. She'd be gone in a heartbeat because noone wants a messed up animal of any kind. And that is so untrue. I find it hard to believe that 95% of the animals they receive have an issue that warrants euthanization. And they also state that they euthanize because the owners who *relinquish* the animal into their care WANT them to. Anyone who is not completely ignorant knows that once an animal is relinquished into someone else's care, the previous owner has no say. So all those cases where the ex-owner requested euthanization is a load of crap. When it becomes PETA's animal, they don't have to do anything anyone tells them.
> 
> I don't like them. Never have, never will. Period. They are extreme and don't pay attention to what matters and you have to practice what you preach. Which apparently, they have forgotten the concept of.


I agree with what you say, I can't say I'm their biggest fan and I do think their euthanization idea is complete poop. But regardless of whether I like them or not, once you read an article about them talking about clubbing seals or something and later on in the year someone says something about clubbing seals, you may end up going "oh yeah i read an article about that stuff going on" and whatnot. The word gets spread and stuffs. But this is the last I'm going to say about peta because I don't like thinking about it :wacko:


----------



## cknauf (Aug 27, 2012)

ArachnidsPlease said:


> I do not classify them as a terrorist group because they are not harming anyone and they do not target people to kill. They support ALF who rescues animals and then destroys the lab once all the animals are rescued, but even ALF schedules these raids to make sure the facility is completely clear of any human activity or people in general. PETA is not out to kill and hurt people, they're out to show the world the abuse that goes on in the world and a lot of times uses the most ridiculous ways to get their point across. You want a terrorist group, look at the ones who crashed into the twin towers. Their main point is to kill, peta is no where near killing. They don't threaten the united states.


Terrorism is any activity designed to cause fear or intimidate to further an ideological goal. The US legal definition is "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents". Destroying a lab, even if no people were injured, would still be a violent act. I don't know enough about PETA to know if they could be considered a terrorist organization, but terrorism isn't all masked men with machine guns; plenty of it is caused by otherwise pedestrian people.


----------



## fight or flight (Sep 28, 2012)

This is a bit late but whenever I have asked questions about my african pygmy hedgehog on yahoo!answers the replies i have got have been 'set him free, its the kindest thing for him' kind of response. Clearly if they new anything about pygmy hogs they would understand they purely bred as pets and if released would be dead in a matter of hours?days! Although in places cockatiels do live wild, all our captive ones are very unlikely to be able to survive in the wild, particularly in our british winters! And in America there are many predators such as snakes, racoons etc, And birds of prey, foxes, badgers in the U.K just my opinion but if they have a large cage and company (human or bird!) i think they are perfectly happy!


----------

