Hello All,

I have been quietly following all the discussion about dominance recently, and I would like to offer a couple thoughts... Couldn't it be that instead of trying to be dominant the bird is simply being aggressive? If not, how do you know? How do you know that it is dominance that drives the aggression and not fear, territorial protection, or just an action that the bird has learned may lead to a desirable consequence? Why does it have to be dominance? When you consider the natural history of parrots, the many things that influence their behavior in the wild, you will find that dominance is a very poor explanation of aggressive events...for parrots anyway.

I understand and agree that dominance is found in many species of animals, but not parrots. Dominance is an on-going relationship where one individual is consistently superior to another. This type of relationship is found in many primates (including humans), elephants, lions, wolves, etc. It is important to note that the dominant ranking does not change with daily situations; it changes when the dominant animal is unseated by another that will go on to assume the dominant role. True, aggression is often a part of this dominance-based relationship. But, that certainly does not mean that all aggression is associated with dominance...especially in parrots. Aggression in wild parrots is well documented, but, it is associated with particular situations, not dominance.

A reference for Keas was cited that details dominance in their social groups. I watched Keas in New Zealand and saw a great deal of playing (wrestling) and aggression, mostly over desirable perches and food. But I never saw anything that suggested that one bird was asserting its dominance over another, or that there was any type of pecking order in the group. But, I only watched the birds for one day, which was enough to tell me that they are very different from other species of parrots I have watched in the wild. They are so different that it would not surprise me if I learned that they did have a hierarchy in the wild.

I think it is easy for people to speak of aggression in parrots as their quest for dominance. Dominance is a strategy that some humans use in their relationships with other humans, therefore they can easily relate to it. Also, blaming aggressive behavior on dominance is easier than the alternative. The alternative is simply, "aggression." Few people want to think that their bird was just being aggressive, especially when they consider that they possibly caused the aggression. Since aggression in parrots is associated with specific situations, not dominance, and parrot owners control most situations where parrots show aggression to humans (especially if they have clipped wings), then, the parrot owner should accept responsibility for putting the bird in a situation that causes aggression. This is not a comfortable thought for most people. It is so much easier to say the bird is trying to be dominant...it puts blame on the bird and relieves the person of responsibility ... and justifies the wounds.

A parrot that bites you when you try to take it off the top of its cage is not trying to assert its dominance, it is exhibiting aggression. He is not trying to establish a position of superiority over you, he is just trying, in the only way he knows, to tell you that he does not want to be taken off the top of the cage. Why? What happens when most parrot owners take their parrot off the top of the cage? They put it inside the cage, close the door and go to bed or go to work. Birds quickly learn to understand these associations and also quickly learn that aggression works on humans (even to momentarily stop the person from trying to take the bird off the cage). Parrots like high perches. I think nature tells parrots that high perches are desirable because they provide good look-out points and they are away from predators and other undesirable situations. High perches are also away from people who they may just not want to be with at that particular time.

It is far easier for people to put a label on a situation that relieves them of responsibility than it is to understand and work out their relationship with their bird. The "phobic bird" may be another example of this. It is much easier to say you acquired a phobic bird (one with an irrational fear) than it is to say your bird is afraid of you (a rational fear). It is normal for some birds to be afraid of new situations or even people. But, when you label the bird phobic it relieves you of responsibility and justifies the bites you receive when you shower your frightened bird with loving attention. However, if you realized the bird is simply frightened by you, you may approach the situation differently as you work to establish a positive relationship with the bird.

Birds are severely limited in their ability to communicate with us. The best thing a parrot owner could do for their bird is to be more sensitive to their bird's body language and be more perceptive and understanding of their bird's side of the two-way communication. Too many parrot owners are only concerned with what they tell their parrot and ignore what their bird is trying to tell them. Parrot owners need to learn to listen to what their birds are telling them and care about what they say. If you never force a bird to do anything, and I mean anything, you will have a better relationship with your bird. You can "make" your bird do what you want or you can "let" your bird do what you want. Either way, you are training it. You say your bird does not react well to training. You need to understand that every time you interact with your bird you are training it. You are using positive or negative reinforcement to shape and influence its behavior. When you force the bird to step on your hand you are using negative reinforcement, the bird is avoiding something negative (being chased until he complies). If you "let" the bird step on your hand for something positive (a scratch on the head, verbal praise, companionship, treats, etc.) the bird will be more willing to perform the behavior in the future. The best animal training, and the best relationships, are accomplished through positive interactions not dominance or other negative approaches. By the way, the same holds true for people.