Fass-Holmes, B. (2004) Why do parrots pluck their own feathers?

Parrots,
78, 2025.
Feather plucking completely puzzles me. Given that feathers are essential for
flight, and flight is essential for survival behaviors (foraging, escaping from
predators, finding a mate, etc.), the number of parrots that pluck should be
a big zero.
But its not. An astonishing number of parrots pluck their own feathers, some to
such an extreme that theyre almost totally naked (many illustrative photos are
available online; for example, http://www.parrotline.org/monty.htm and
http://www.parrotcompany.com/plucking.html). This goes against everything
I understand about behavioral evolution. Parrots should be no more likely
to pluck their own feathers than you and I should be to cut off our own legs or
yank out all our own teeth. Yet parrots do pluck.
Theres more that baffles me about feather plucking. Despite everything
Ive read and how long and hard Ive thought about it, I can come up with only
one common denominator linking feather plucked parrotsthey all live in
captivity. (Perhaps some wild parrots pluck too, but none of them has survived
long enough to be witnessed by humans?) If living in captivity is the key factor,
then how come only some captive parrots pluck their feathers?
My interest in feather plucking goes beyond this intellectual paradox. Its a really
serious affliction. Quality of life, welfare, and health are severely compromised,
and Im sure that most (if not all) owners of plucked parrots feel considerable
distress over their beloved pets condition and want a cure yesterday.
My goal in this article, then, is to critically examine from a scientific perspective
some of the popularized notions about what causes feather plucking in parrots.
Many of these ideas have been repeated so often that they are accepted as fact
nowadays despite sufficient evidence to warrant questioning their applicability
and usefulness. I hope youll come to agree (if you dont already) that the pet
parrot community, in the future, must rely more heavily on rigorous research
findings than anecdotal or traditional wisdoms to promote greater success in
developing effective treatments and preventive measures for feather plucking.
Psittacine segregation
If youve read the pet parrot literature, visited parrot-related web sites, or
listened to parrot behavior consultants, youre probably already familiar with
many explanations for feather plucking. Which one is your favorite? Mine is what
I call the mixed continent explanationfeather plucking is due to keeping two
or more parrots in the same room whose species originate from different
2
continents. An example of this would be housing a budgerigar within eyesight of
a double yellow-headed amazon.
The underlying logic goes something like this. Parrots from different continents
have never seen each other before in the wild. When they live in the same
captive environment without any visual barriers, they dont recognize each other
and become stressed. They cant escape from the source of their stress and so
they take it out on their own plumage.
This explanation became my favorite because it was the first one I learned about
after acquiring my first parrot (not because its necessarily valid). I found out
about it from a parrot rescue organizations newsletter thatin addition to web
pages, listserves, and forumsprovided rapid, widespread, and inexpensive
dissemination of the mixed continent explanation.
The basis for the mixed continent explanation was the findings of a survey that
had been filled out by plucked parrots owners. Needless to say, the results
were dramatic, as described below by the surveys author.
. . . in almost every case [out of 168], the undiagnosed bird lived
in the same house with another bird that was not just another
bird, but a bird from a different continent.. . . . I realized that
I had over-looked one other thing that happened when [my own
African grey] started plucking.....That was the year that I adopted
my Orange-winged Amazon.....A bird from a different continent!
The two birds have been in the same room together for three years
. . . I thought that they were jealous, however, if the results of the
survey are to be believed, the reason might just be terror.
http://www.realmacaw.com/pages/pluck.html
The author of this survey had a solution that was quite logical and simple, given
her premise that feather-plucking happened when parrots from different
continents lived in the same house. . . I suggest that you try keeping your birds
in separate rooms. From a scientific perspective, it would be interesting to find
out what percentage of parrot owners with mixed continent situations followed
this advice, what percentage of those who did follow it now have plucked parrots,
and what percentage of those who did not follow it now have plucked parrots. To
my knowledge, such questions have yet to be investigated.
Are you convinced?
The surveys results are intriguing and impressive at a glance, no question; and
the authors suggestion to keep parrots from different continents in different
3
rooms could be right. But if you have fully feathered parrots from mixed
continents living in the same room of your home (or you know someone who
does), this is good reason to be skeptical about the mixed continent explanation.
In case you fancy the mixed continent explanation, heres something to consider.
The author of this explanation says that parrots from different continents pluck
their own feathers out of terror when theyre kept in the same room because
they were never meant to meet in nature. Well then, what about parrots from
different continents kept in the same room at pet shops? (Note: I, for one, have
seen macaws and cockatoos in the same room at many shops, all in wonderful
feather.) How about parrots kept with a dog, cat, or even primate (of the human
variety) that theyve never met in nature before? Ones in zoos with diverse
species of animals theyve never met before? Come to think of it, the mixed
continent explanation would lead us to predict incidences of feather plucking
where it usually does not occur. A valid explanation should be able to correctly
predict observed circumstances, yet the mixed continent explanation likely
would have trouble accounting for the ones above.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1 about here. Caption: These eclectus parrots are housed in the Owens
Rain Forest Aviary at the San Diego Zoo (http://www.sandiegozoo.org/zoo/
rainforest.html) along with 59 other species of birds. Are they fully-feathered
because the other species also are natives of Australia or Southeast Asia?
------------------------------------------------------------------
Another pitfall for the mixed continent explanation is that the survey has several
methodological shortcomings which weaken its findings. First, while the surveys
results are highly suggestive, its design is inadequate to prove this explanation.
The design can only provide circumstantial evidence, like a criminal trial which
shows that the defendant was at the crime scene but not that the defendant
actually committed the crime. The surveys findings similarly showed that
the respondents plucked parrots lived with others from a different continent but
not that this caused them to pluck. Second, the surveys respondents are a self-
selected subset of owners who have a feather plucked parrot; unlike all other
owners of plucked parrots, they are ones who found out about the survey and
took time to complete it. This makes the results statistically biased. Lastly,
the survey asked whether the owners kept a parrot from another continent in
the same room with the plucked parrot, but we dont know for how long or
whether the parrots could see or physically contact each otherthese might be
important variables in the mixed continent scenario.
4
To convince everyone that this explanation holds water, whats needed is a more
scientific approach. One such approach would be to administer the survey to
a truly representative, randomly selected group of owners who have a feather
plucked parrot. Even better would be a controlled study in which same-aged
parrots of the same species are raised to weaning under identical circumstances
and then are moved to one of two identical conditions that differ in only a single
regardone condition includes another parrot from the same continent while
the other includes another parrot from a different continent. I am unaware of any
reports of such a study.
In summary, the mixed continent explanation is so tantalizing because, if correct,
the circumstances that purportedly promote feather plucking readily could be
remedied; i.e., move one parrot to a different room. But the evidence supporting
this explanation has too many limitations to warrant acceptance at the present
time. Later in this article, I will discuss the findings of several recently published
laboratory studies on captive parrots behaviorsincluding feather plucking
that all parrot owners would be interested in and should know about.
Other explanations
Just about every one of the numerous explanations for feather plucking can be
organized into three major categories: environmental, biological/medical, and
psychological/behavioral. They are listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1. Popular explanations for feather plucking in parrots
ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGICAL/MEDICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL/BEHAVIORAL
Cage size Allergy Boredom
Climate
low humidity
temperature
Dietary insufficiency Frustration
Constant change Genetic background Interactions with humans
Unfamiliar events
noises
people
television, etc.
Hormones Redirection of natural behaviors
flying
foraging
mating
Infection Stereotypy
Sleep insufficiency Trauma
Toxins
glue
zinc
Unresolved conflict
inability to fly, forage, or mate
when motivated to do so
5
------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 2 about here. Caption: This scarlet macaw lived outdoors, unable to fly,
for years at the San Diego Zoo where weather conditions were considerably drier
and cooler than his native rain forests in South America. Yet he remained fully-
feathered.
------------------------------------------------------------------
While it is entirely possible that some or each of these explanations could be
partially correct, evidence is lacking to accept any single one as the explanation
for feather plucking. For instance, to be convinced that zinc ingestion and toxicity
explain feather plucking, we would need at least the following two studiesone
showing that a randomly selected sample of feather plucked parrots has
consistently and statistically higher blood levels of zinc than another group of
parrots that is comparable in every way (i.e., randomly selected; same species,
age, gender, housing conditions, etc.) except they are unplucked, and a second
showing that a statistically higher proportion of parrots in a group exposed to
zinc develops feather plucking than in a comparable group (i.e., randomly
selected; same species, age, gender, housing conditions, etc.) not exposed to
zinc. Each of these two studies could be conducted twice; one time using
laboratory parrots and a second time using pet parrots treated by avian
veterinarians.
In other words, we would need evidence that almost all feather plucked parrots
have elevated zinc levels, almost all intact parrots have negligible zinc levels,
very few (if any) feather plucked parrots have negligible zinc levels, and very few
(if any) unplucked parrots have elevated zinc levels. I have read reports by some
avian veterinarians stating that high percentages of their client parrots with
elevated levels of zinc were picking their feathers (e.g., http://www.
forthebirdsdvm.com/zinc.htm). To my knowledge, however, no systematically
controlled laboratory or clinical studies on zinc levels in randomly sampled
groups of plucked and unplucked parrots have been reported.
The psychological/behavioral explanations in Table 1 are at least as challenging
to support convincingly as the others. For example, Ive read many articles in
the pet parrot literature (and most likely you have too) suggesting that boredom
or absence of intellectual stimulation leads to feather plucking. The idea behind
this explanation is that parrots will chew their own feathers if they dont have
other tasks to occupy their time. A striking counter-example to this notion comes
from the scientific research conducted by Dr. Irene Pepperberg on psittacines
intellectual and communication capabilities (http://www.alexfoundation.org/
research/index. html). Her well-known African grey Alex began feather plucking
while participating in the research despite extraordinary amounts of daily
6
intellectual stimulation. He fortunately has recovered and now is in good feather,
but another participant (Griffin) has begun plucking. This is not to say that
parrots safely can be deprived of intellectual stimulation, rather that boredom
is at best only a partial explanation for feather plucking. A similar case can be
made for the other psychological/behavioral explanations in Table 1.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 3 about here. Caption: Under essentially identical diet, housing conditions,
and daily intellectual stimulation during adulthood, one African grey participating
in Dr. Irene Pepperberg's research on cognitive and communication capabilities
engaged in feather plucking while the other two do not. Photo courtesy of Mike
Lovett, Director of Photography, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts.
------------------------------------------------------------------
What science shows
A well-controlled series of research studies on cage conditions and parrot
behaviorincluding feather pluckinghas been conducted and the results
published in scientific journals by Dr. Cheryl Meehan. This research is the basis
for her dissertation under Professor Joy Mench at the University of California,
Davis (http://animalscience.ucdavis.edu/faculty/mench/) whose laboratorys
focus is on assessing and improving animal welfare. Cheryls project investigated
pet parrots behavioral welfare problems with the goal of uncovering potential
causes and cures. Specifically, her experiments used orange-winged Amazons
as a model for the relationship between environmental complexity and
behavioral development in psittacines. Here are the details on her research
methods.
The orange-winged Amazons were parent-reared in the laboratory by wild-
caught pairs. After weaning at about 4.5 months of age, chicks were randomly
assigned to one of two groupsone housed with enrichments and the other
without. They were moved into individual cages (0.75m x 0.75m x 1.0m)
containing only one wooden perch, a feeder containing a nutritionally sound
pelleted diet, a drinker, and limited amounts of fruits, vegetables, seeds, and
nuts offered daily. These additional foods were placed in enrichment items to
provide foraging opportunities for the enriched group; in the feeder for the
unenriched group. Each Amazon could see only his/her neighbor but could hear
all others. The laboratorys day/night cycle provided 13 hours of darkness;
a window admitted some natural light to supplement standard lighting.
Two types of enrichments were placed in the enriched groups cages. Foraging
enrichments provided opportunities for the parrots to work for foods (chew
through barriers, manipulate objects through holes, sort out inedible materials,
7
open containers). Physical enrichments provided opportunities to perch, climb,
swing, and manipulate objects. The enriched group had access to these
enrichments throughout their experimental treatment period, and the unenriched
group had access to them only during a 16-week period after an initial
unenriched interval of 48 weeks.
Feather quality scores (a 10-point scale for 5 different body areaschest/flank,
back, legs, tail, wings) were collected as a measure of feather-plucking
behavior. Two trained researchers with a high degree of reliability and unaware
of the parrots housing conditions individually rated every parrots feather
condition each month using 20-minute videotapes recorded three times per
week. The ratings were statistically analyzed for intergroup differences, changes
over time, and changes exhibited by the unenriched group after introduction of
enrichments in their previously barren cages.
Meehan, Millam, and Menchs (2003) study most likely is the very first laboratory
experiment to systematically test the effects of environmental conditions on
development and reduction of feather plucking in a single captive parrot
species. In this study, environmental enrichments were shown to play
an important role in preventing this behavior and in reducing its severity for
cases where it already had begun. Here are the details of their findings.
All enriched parrots in the study interacted with each of the enrichment items.
Their usage was constant during the first 32 weeks and declined significantly
during the next 16 weeks. The enriched group used their foraging items
significantly more than their physical ones. This is a very important finding,
because it suggests that captive parrots (at least orange-winged Amazons)
prefer to work for food instead of climbing, swinging, perching, or manipulating
toys.
At the beginning of the study, the mean feather score for the enriched group was
8.56 and for the unenriched group it was 8.87 out of a maximum of 10 points.
These scores changed significantly over the course of the study in different
directions for the two groups. The enriched parrots score improved by 0.625
point while the control parrots score decreased by 1.375 points during
the same 32-week period. Time-course graphs showed that the enriched
groups rate of increase in feather score was less than the unenriched groups
rate of decrease. These results strongly suggest that the unenriched groups
deterioration in feathering quality was greater and faster than the enriched
groups improvement.
8
When enrichments were placed in the unenriched groups cages, these parrots
showed a two-day delay before beginning to interact with the items. Like
the enriched group, they also used the foraging items significantly more than
the physical ones. Most importantly, however, evidence of re-feathering
occurred during the first two weeks after introduction of enrichment items, and
the feather scores improved significantly over time. Before introduction, six of
the eight unenriched Amazons showed a decreased feather score (the other two
stayed the same). After introduction, six of the eight showed an increased
feather score. The rate and degree of change in the unenriched parrots
feathering score were statistically significant; in addition, the improvement during
enrichment happened significantly faster than the deterioration that occurred
before enrichment.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 4 about here. Caption: An unenriched orange-winged Amazon in
Dr. Cheryl Meehan's study shows evidence of feather plucking.
------------------------------------------------------------------
These findings support Meehan et al.s (2003) conclusions that foraging and
physical enrichments successfully prevented deterioration in feather condition
in the enriched group and significantly improved feather condition in
the unenriched parrots after introduction to the same enrichments for a 16-
week interval. The improvement in feather condition contrasts with a previous
report (Van Hoek and King, 1997) that feather plucked conures reduced their
preening behaviors after the introduction of enrichment items in their enclosures
but their feather quality did not improve. Further research is needed to resolve
whether this discrepancy is related to species, enrichment, or some other
difference between these two studies.
Several additional points are worth noting about the results reported by Meehan
et al. (2003). First, a majority of the unenriched group showed significant
deterioration in feather condition even though they were given an adequate
duration of darkness for sleeping. Pet parrot consultants often point to
inadequate sleep as the explanation for feather plucking, presumably because
they have heard of research on mammals showing that long-term sleep
deprivation can have negative emotional and cognitive effects. However, I am
unaware of any scientific research on sleep requirements and deprivation effects
in parrots, and Meehan et al. (2003) clearly have shown that feather plucking
can occur in captive parrots provided with 13 hours of darkness daily. Second,
the unenriched groups feather deterioration occurred despite access to
a nutritionally sound, balanced diet. Pet parrot consultants might cite inadequate
diet as another explanation for feather plucking, presumably because their
9
clients include parrots that have been fed seeds only. Although Meehan et al.
(2003) did not report data on eating or body weight, they clearly have shown
that feather plucking can occur in captive parrots offered a nutritious, varied
diet. Lastly, the feather plucking in the unenriched group occurred under
controlled laboratory conditions rather than under the conditions usually found in
owners homes. Pet parrot consultants mention many of the environmental and
psychological/ behavioral factors listed in Table 1 as causes of feather plucking,
presumably because their clients homes have low humidity, constant change,
aberrant human behaviors (e.g., yelling, inconsistent attention), etc. Most, if not
all, of these factors have been controlled in the laboratory setting of Meehan et
al.s (2003) study, yet the majority of Amazons in the unenriched group showed
significant deterioration of feather condition.
Again, this does not mean that parrot owners can safely deprive their pets of
sleep and a nutritionally sound diet, or provide an unsuitable home environment.
The point here is that the anecdotally supported explanations for why feather
plucking occurs in pet parrots have yet to be scientifically validated.
Meehan et al. (2003) offer a different explanation than the ones that pet parrot
consultants typically advocate. Given that the enriched Amazons used their
foraging items for a significantly longer period of time than the physical ones,
these research findings suggest a relation between the absence of foraging
opportunities and feather plucking. Previous studies on chickens had similar
results (e.g., Huber-Eicher and Wechsler, 1997). How then can we explain
the parrots that live in captivity for years without foraging opportunities and are
fully feathered? This is one of the paradoxes to which I alluded at the beginning.
In her other disssertation studies (using similar experimental conditions and
designs), Cheryl Meehan has provided scientific evidence that environmental
enrichment also
prevents and reduces (but does not completely eliminate) stereotypical
behaviors (abnormal repetitive, unvarying, and apparently functionless behavior)
such as pacing and cage bar chewing
reduces fearfulness toward novel objects and human caregivers
increases exploratory behavior
and promotes behavioral flexibility.
These beneficial effects of enrichment thus can contribute to improved welfare
for captive parrots.
Another remarkable outcome of this research is that social housing (i.e., keeping
pairs of same-gender, same-species parrots in the same cage) might be even
better than environmental enrichment in improving welfare. Meehan, Garner,
10
and Mench (2003) found that same-gender, pair-housed orange-winged
Amazons used enrichment items significantly more, spent significantly more time
climbing, flying, and walking, spent significantly less time screaming, and were
inactive significantly less time than Amazons housed individually. Most
interestingly, the pair-housed parrots fear and aggression responses to a
familiar human were comparable to those of single-housed parrots; and their
responses to an unfamiliar human were less fearful and aggressive than those of
single-housed parrots.
This finding is contrary to one of the pet parrot communitys conventional
wisdoms. Parrot behavior consultants frequently have publicized claims that pair
housing diminishes pet quality because bonding allegedly is established between
the pair rather than with the owner (e.g., Blanchard, 1999) even though no
research on this topic had been published (to my knowledge) supporting these
claims. On the contrary, published research has shown that various mammalian
species (including humans) housed in social isolation typically exhibit abnormal
behaviors such as stereotypy, aggression, and fearfulness in the presence of
novel objects (e.g., Dennis, 1941).
What Cheryl Meehans research suggests, then, is that a parrots captive
environment which restricts social interaction and foraging opportunities could
contribute to the development of behavioral stereotypies including feather
plucking. We know from studies on the natural history of parrots that they are
social in the wild, yet we rarely house them communally in captivity due to
husbandry challenges (e.g., minimize spread of disease and occurrences of
aggression-induced injury; maximize space utilization). The absence of cage-
mates very well could be a contributing factor to feather plucking in captive
parrots. Pair housing would be more similar to what parrots experience in
the wild than what they ordinarily experience in captivity.
Inconclusive conclusion
You might conclude that these research findings solve my puzzlement about
what causes feather plucking. After all, they provide evidence that the absence
of foraging opportunities and social interactions with a cage-mate can lead to
increased incidences of behavioral problems, including feather plucking.
However, this still does not account for pet parrots housed individually without
opportunities to work for food that are fully feathered.
In the next issue of Parrots magazine, I will discuss another alternative for your
consideration that has some scientific evidence to support it.
11
About the author: Barry Fass-Holmes earned B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees in
Biological Psychology at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts. He has
taught undergraduate courses in Animal Learning and conducted research on
animal learning and memory.
RECOMMENDED READING
Aengus, W.L. and Millam, J.R., 1999. Taming parent-reared orange-winged
Amazon parrots by neonatal handling. Zoo Biology, 18, 177187.
Blanchard, S., 1999. Common parrot behavioral myths & why they are myths.
http://www.companionparrot.com/articles/myths.html
Dennis, W., 1941. Infantile development under conditions of restricted practice
and of minimal social stimulation. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 23,
143189.
Garner, J. P., Meehan, C. L., and Mench, J. A., 2003. Stereotypies in caged
parrots, schizophrenia and autism: evidence for a common mechanism.
Behavioural Brain Research, 145, 125-134.
Huber-Eicher, B. and Wechsler, B., 1997. Feather pecking in domestic chicks: its
relation to dustbathing and foraging. Animal Behavior, 54, 757768.
Jenkins, J.R., 2001. Feather picking and self-mutilation in psittacine birds.
Veterinarian Clinics of North America: Exotic Animal Practice, 4, 651666.
Meehan, C.L., 2002. Environmental enrichment and behavioral development of
orange-winged Amazon parrots (Amazona amazonica): Applications to animal
welfare. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Davis. http://wwwlib.umi.
com/dissertations/preview/3062246
Meehan, C.L. and Mench, J.A., 2002. Environmental enrichment affects the fear
and exploratory responses to novelty of young Amazon parrots. Applied Animal
Behaviour Science, 79, 7588.
Meehan, C.L., Millam, J.R., and Mench, J.A., 2003. Foraging opportunity and
increased physical complexity both prevent and reduce psychogenic feather
picking by young Amazon parrots. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 80,
7185.
Meehan, C. L., Garner, J.P., and Mench, J.A., 2003. Isosexual pair housing
improves the welfare of young Amazon parrots. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science, 81, 7388
Meehan, C.L., Garner, J.P., and Mench, J.A., 2004. Environmental enrichment
and development of cage stereotypy in orange-winged Amazon parrots
(Amazona amazonica). Developmental Psychobiology, 44, 209218.
van Hoek, C.S. and King, C.E., 1997. Causation and influence of environmental
enrichment on feather picking of the crimson-bellied conure (Pyrrhura perlata
perlata). Zoo Biology, 16, 161172.