"Every so often someone must say: Now is the time to stop and see what we know. Without such pauses, epistemology--the process knowing--is a bargain basement, shoppers jousting and shouting as they grab at a garment that fits and one that, momentarily, is in style." The Tangled Wing by Melvin Konner.

Ever since I became involved in keeping parrots, attempting to give advice about proper environments and building relationships, I have assiduously stuck to the old tenet that permitting them the "high spot" would be detrimental to their eventual behavior patterns and consequently to the evolving relationship. For some reason all the behavioral experts, books published, articles written were emphatic about "parrot domination behavior": How it would affect the relationship between caregiver and parrot and how it must be curbed. Innocently and convinced of this "truth" and in the absence of more concrete information I joined the crowd. (Although in defiance of this "law of nature" I always allow my birds on my shoulder.) At that time it just seemed to make sense. Well, all of us were wrong!

It seems that the behaviorist who sometimes inadvertently deals with entirely human interpretations and conclusions in this particular case is eager to assume something that could not be further from the parrots mind. (I am wondering what else we are wrong about.) I have no idea, how this myth was created, but there it was and it made sense, in a human kind of way. It is probable that we mistook aggressive behavior for the attempt to dominate--and about that there is no doubt. These are still wild birds and individual territories, breeding sites, hormonal urges and apparently even flock loyalty may be the underlying cause. Other reasons for aggressive behavior are surely fear, distrust or outright dislike for a person or another parrot.

The intricate and survival driven flock behavior patterns of these intelligent and sensitive birds is constantly being studied and new conclusions have to be drawn consistent with the results of very serious research by avian biologists. One thing seems to be certain--there are no "flock leaders" and there is no consistent dominating behavior by members of parrot flocks. Observing flock composition, life style and size, this theory has lost its validity. It does not make sense anymore. There will always be the tendency to seek height, especially when a threat is perceived or to roost for the night. The reason is obvious: relative security.

It appears that these flocks operate as a homogenous entity, each bird dependent on the other for its survival. That is why body language plays such a vital part and why our parrots are so observant and intuitive. A perceived threat from the outside, the temporary aggressive behavior pattern by individual flock members are transmitted in that manner and are immediately recognized and respected as signs of warning. We must get used to the idea that these intelligent and intuitive creatures cannot be compared to any other pet animal we are likely to encounter. Their reaction to outside stimuli are driven by instinct AND reasoning. A parrot does nothing without a reason--even if it is often beyond our intuitive and emphatic abilities to understand.

The absence of inappropriate behavior induced by the need to dominate however, does not eliminate the many other potential reasons--eliminating one does not eliminate the others. It may make it a little easier to understand our feathered friends--it does not make our life with them any less potentially complicated.

It remains to be said that many a parrot caregiver has been bitten by Mr. Wonderful while perching on their shoulder. The fact that it was not dominance induced did not make it any less painful. The problem with parrots on the shoulder really becomes one of control and warning. Body language is extremely difficult to detect by peripheral vision and the bite happens very quickly. So, the word is still: "please, not on the shoulder," unless you really know your bird and are willing to take a chance.

Furthermore, the old adage that the "high perch" may lead to domination behavior is still partly valid--if one substitutes the word "aggressive" for "domination." Now it makes perfect "bird sense": "The higher I can sit, the more secure I feel and consequently I have the emotional freedom to be aggressive. If I land on the floor for some reason or if I am taken into an unfamiliar room or situation, it is my first objective to feel secure again. I have my priorities and as a prey bird, my first priority is security! After that, I do have some other issues which have to do with mating, eating and allopreening or teaching a teenager some flock manners!

Once we have established relationships of trust with our birds, the feeling of being secure comes along with that and the "high perch" largely loses its importance to the bird. Now he/she feels secure on all levels, this, however does not eliminate the potential for isolated cases of aggressive behavior--but then there is always the body language which tells us: "Please leave me alone, I have a headache!"

There is a very, very important conclusion that we should draw. Since there are no flock leaders in the wild, there can be no flock leaders anywhere. Consequently any attempt to pattern our relationship with our birds in that manner is bound to create stress, friction and ultimately the loss of trust. Sally Blanchard put it well and succinctly: "We must see ourselves as benevolent and patient teachers as opposed to being "in charge." That is an entirely human concept and clearly does not apply here. (At this point I am wondering what happens in the mind of a parrot in a human flock which is "ruled" by a very dominant human.) There is another, equally important lesson here: we ain't as smart as we think we are!