And the science of zookeeping is improving. The San Diego Zoo used to have a tiny little enclosure for the Polar Bears. One poor bear simply went insane, probably from sensory deprivation. The critter fell into horribly stereotyped repetitive behavior.
Later, they built a much larger enclosure, with lots of sensory richness: a large pool, a waterfall, a little river, etc. They put the insane polar bear into this enclosure…and she almost immediately died. It was too late for her.
But the bears in there now are okay. The keepers give them constant little treats, and puzzles, and unexpected events, to keep them from going stale.
Is it as good as 100,000 square miles of arctic range? Of course not. But it’s a damn sight better than what we had thirty years ago.
Birds without wings would look very strange. Seriously strange.
My WAG is that the person who talked to the OP thought that pinioning was like declawing. When I talk about declawing, I call it cutting toes off. As in “Lucky had his toes cut off before I rescued him.” Lucky didn’t have all of his toes cut off, just the first joint.
So, the person who was anti-pinioning used the same sort of hyperbole as I do.
Do they? How do you know that? How do YOU know what birds like and do not like to do? And don’t say “because they do it all the time”. I spend most of my waking hours sitting in a chair somewhere. That doesn’t mean I like it.
What evidence do you have that birds get enjoyment or happiness out of flying that they cannot get in a cage?
Something that made me a little sad was when I went to the local zoo, and the lady working there told us about a resident hawk’s “girlfriend.” The zoo had a red-tailed hawk (he was in the zoo because he’d been injured and couldn’t be returned to the wild, I believe.) Outside of the hawk’s enclosure, there was a wild female red-tailed hawk who would hang around outside the enclosure. It’s kind of sad that the two of them couldn’t be together.
Man, I am sort of disappointed that I was working hard today, at the zoo, and didn’t get a chance to answer this before my learned friends said (almost) everything worth saying. Nice work, chaps!
One more point of information: most zoo animals are born in captivity. No reputable zoo heads out to the jungle to collect specimens any more - or, at least, not without specific goals, and an arduous approval process first. Many animals in the zoo where I work are 5 generations removed from their wild ancestors. These animals, unless they are being specifically bred for release, probably could not survive outside of a zoo environment.
We also provide homes for non-releaseable wildlife, especially birds of prey with wing injuries. If these homes couldn’t be provided, wildlife rehabilitation centers would need to euthanize many more birds which aren’t able to survive in the wild, but still go on to healthy, happy lives, breeding, fostering orphans, and, of course, teaching the public. Our zoo has a 12 year old great horned owl who has been presented in front of more than 100,000 children. These children just gained a personal connection with local native wildlife.
None of this information is a secret. If the OP had done a little research, perhaps their post might have been a little more thought-provoking. As it stands, it made me laugh.
Indeed. Not to disagree with anything explained upthread, as a point of information, the facility at which I work has a number of native birds who have undergone surgical wing amputation in order to save their lives after they incurred devastating traumatic injuries in the wild. Displayed and exhibited for educational purposes or used as surrogate conspecifics for other patients under care, these birds serve worthwhile purposes and live sheltered and protected lives in a zoo-like setting. **araminty **mentions great horned owls and two of ours are nearly 30 years old. One has also been presented to a similar number of people in educational programs while the other provides foster care for orphaned baby great horned owls brought for treatment. This bird raises them with age- and species-appropriate behaviors, teaches initial prey capture techniques, provides appropriate species recognition and indoctrinates them in proper great horned owl social behaviors. After flight conditioning and further prey training, the resulting fledglings are released to the wild.
While it would perhaps be technically correct to say that “we’ve cut the wings off” these and other birds, not even the newest, most novice volunteer docent would ever make such a statement to a member of the public. If the statement reported was accurate, something I’m inclined to doubt, the speaker was being an ass.
Yes, I believe that is the consensus. Or a sheltered 14-yr-old know-it-all who doesn’t know his limitations. Or both, since they mean pretty much the same thing.
I haven’t trimmed Bipperbird’s flight feathers in at least five years. He’d a grouchy old (at least 27 years) Blue-Fronted Amazon, and would rather walk and complain that fly any day.
Now this is just fucking idiotic. If you want to be taken seriously on the board, don’t say such moronic stuff.
Maybe they have a few wing-clipped parrots, but many of the parrots at SeaWorldapparently have intact wings and fly freely. There are lots more photos of macaws and parrots with intact wings at SeaWorld. If the attendant told you the wings were cut off, she must have thought you were very gullible (and was evidently right). She still shouldn’t have said anything like that, though.
You forgot a major one: most animals want to not get eaten by other animals. That’s pretty much a constant danger animals face in the wild that they don’t face in a zoo. If the OP is going to project human emotions on to animals, I think he should imagine they feel good about being able to relax and not worry that every day might be their last if they let their guard down.