VSPCA/The Hindu/set caged birds free

[Guest guest]

Date:23/03/2007 URL:

http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/yw/2007/03/23/stories/2007032302740600.htm

 

Out of bondage

SUMIT BHATTACHARJEE

 

It is time to set caged animals free.

 

SILENT CAPTIVES: Animals behind bars

 

Keeping pets has been a passion for ages. Roman empress Cleopatra

maintained a few African leopards in her private chamber. The erstwhile

zamindars and kings of India had the habit of keeping exotic birds and animals

in their farmhouses. It was said that the more exotic the animals, the higher

the status.

 

Though various national and international laws have curbed this hobby or

passion to a great extent, it still continues in some form or the other.

 

Of late, a noted three-star hotel and a hypermarket have introduced an

animal corner on their premises. While the hotel has kept them for attraction

(whom do they attract?), at the supermarket they are for sale.

 

The range of animals varies from exotic lovebirds to cockatiel and from

pigeons to puppies and rabbits. " Most of the species stocked are either under

the exotic category and hence they do not come under the Indian Wildlife Act

(IWA) or are under schedule III of the IWA that gives the leverage of being `not

so threatened species'. The question here is not whether they are endangered or

not but how they are kept, " points out Pradeep Nath, founder of the Visakha

Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (VSPCA).

 

Threat of fumes

 

The birds are kept in cages measuring 2 x 2 feet, leaving very little

space to expand their wings. Moreover, they are exposed to vehicle fumes and

other pollutants throughout the day. They look drowsy and sick. People who had

bought the birds complain that they died within a few days.

The founder of VSPCA opines that confinement of birds and rabbits to small

cages lead to a lot of problems. " Primarily they are sensitive to fumes and

pollutants and confinement to small cages develops problems like heart disease,

indigestion and arthritis. Displaying them may not come directly under the

Wildlife Act but the authorities can always prevail basing on the Prevention of

Cruelty to Animals Act, " says he.

 

Conservator of Forests B. Trinadha Rao is also of the same opinion.

" A few companies have the licence to rear exotic birds that are imported

from other countries. In such cases they cannot be legally held for sale or

exhibition while rabbits and puppies are not listed under the wildlife

provisions. They can be held only if the animals fall under threatened species.

But the prevention of cruelty angle can always be explored, " says he.

 

© Copyright 2000 - 2006 The Hindu

[Guest guest]

>I saw two parrots in a cage, I asked the lady why she is keeping

>these two caged, she said, that one of them had been falling from

>the nest when it was small and they had picked it up and treated and

>then later they got another one to give company to the first one. I

>said, after recovery she could have released it back to the wild,

>but she thought, that parrots always live in groups and once humans

>had touched it, the group would not have accepted it back. Is there

>any truth in that with regard to parrots?

 

 

This is incorrect, but is a common belief based on

misunderstanding one of the more unpleasant aspects of bird behavior.

 

Many birds, most parrots included, lay & hatch extra eggs,

at intervals, so that if anything happens to the first egg, they

will still have offspring. However, unless food is exceptionally

abundant, they usually cannot raise two or three offspring

successfully, so at a certain point the older & larger baby pushes

the others out of the nest to die, or the parents do.

 

Parrots are notorious for doing this, & some of the most

successful wild parrot conservation programs, e.g. at Tamopati in

the Peruvian Amazon, take advantage of this by finding & collecting

the cast-offs. They are then hand-raised, and eventually return

successfully to the wild. The trick is being able to provide more

food than the parents could.

 

Back in Victorian times, before this behavior was

well-known, well-meaning people would rescue cast out baby birds,

put them back in the nest, & be appalled when the parent birds

pushed them out again.

 

The explanation developed that the babies were being rejected

because they had been touched, but that turned out to be just plain

wrong. They were being rejected a second time because they had

already been rejected the first time.

 

My introduction to this came one afternoon in about 1974 when

I climbed a tree in San Jose to return a baby starling to the nest-- &

the mother starling promptly decapitated it, sending me looking for

explanations.

 

Older books told the old story. One of my housemates,

however, was an ornithologist who later wrote a field guide to the

birds of the region, & knew what had really happened.

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]