The caged bird industry, promoted by pet shops and backyard breeders, is an enormously cruel industry.  All birds have evolved to fly.  In captivity they can, at best, flutter from one perch to the next.  In small cages they can't even do that.  Just think: birds in the wild spend time foraging for food - in a cage they have absolutely nothing to do.  Caged birds develop neurotic behaviour as a result of frustration and boredom.  They start to self-peck or mutilate themselves by pulling out their feathers and pecking holes in their stomach leading to death.  They may also rock and sway from side to side, bob up and down, screech frequently and become aggressive.  It goes without saying that there is a great need to expose this subject and get it out in the open.  Lynette MacQueen, former director of Animal Liberation NSW speaks to Abolitionist-Online.

Claudette:  How did the issue of caged bird rescue become of interest to you?

Lynette:  It came to my attention through a woman at Animal Liberation NSW.  If you have compassion for animals then you start to consider what that means and the ramifications of what it must be like for birds trapped in cages.  I then started thinking about it and looking around me and realising how prevalent birds in cages are.

Claudette:  Out of all the animals suffering in the world today, why did you focus on birds?

Lynette:  Many people ask me that.  It's partly because I know they are so much at our mercy and also because they not given consideration in the same way as a lot of other animals like cats, dogs and horses.

Claudette:  … like bird liberation hasn't really been developed by the animal rights movement in a big way at all …

Lynette:  That's right.  Also, hierarchically, birds are way down the chain as far as consideration for their instinctive rights for liberation are concerned.

Claudette:  The bird liberations that have been conducted in Sydney in the past six or so years and the accompanying general public opinion polls seem to agree with you.  Most have said it's immoral to keep a bird in a cage.  What are the ethics involved with this?

Lynette:  A friend once said to me: What has a bird done wrong which results in it being kept in a prison for the rest of its life? - and that's a very good question.  I can't fathom the answer to that.  I don't know why people take on ownership to the extent that it prevents and hinders a bird's freedom.  You can relate that to stories you hear about parents who have kept their children locked up in rooms or cupboards for years and years.  When that's revealed people think it's horrendous and it is.  The concept of 'ownership' and what gives people the right to an abusive 'ownership' is something I often ponder.  History records that Leonardo da Vinci would visit the market place, purchase birds in cages and then release them.

Claudette:  Once birds have been liberated from their cages in a controlled environment, to watch them peel away any unnatural 'adaptive' restraints is like seeing an unfolding taking place.  Can you talk about that please Lynette?

Lynette:  Birds are intelligent beings.  They know what's happened to them.  People who think there is nothing inherently wrong with caged birds think that since the bird was born in a cage, that's what they are used to so it's ok.  If you relate that to a human element, if a child is kept in a house and not allowed to explore their outside world, why is that right based on the fact that that's all they know too.  The argument doesn't hold any weight.

Claudette:  A few years ago there was a huge story in the papers that ran for weeks about a caged bird rescue in the Prime Minister John Howard's electorate.  I remember it well because some of the shock jocks like John Laws were calling for these rescuers heads on a plate.  His reaction was totally out of proportion to the event itself.  He said, "How can these people stop our enjoyment of looking at a bird in a cage"?  And I guess that's why it comes back to  speciesism.  Human hedonistic pleasure regardless of any consequences of who gets hurt in the process.

Lynette:  It's hard to comprehend what John Law's was actually saying by that statement but it's a typical unintelligent comment.  I think the idea of so called pleasure for humans by prohibiting birds or animals to experience their natural instincts, such as birds are denied in a cage.

Claudette:  In the seventies it was big to do a bird rescue or a farmed animal rescue and just let the animals run free but this is not the way to go is it?

Lynette:  No.  I'm aware of an instance when there was a rescue of pigs where they were just released and this wasn't a good idea.  The pigs injured themselves, were recaptured and then taken back to their confined enclosures, so they were in no better situation than before.  I think there needs to be much thought and after-care follow through work put into these types of actions.  With birds, unless the bird has only been in a cage for a few days or weeks without losing its innate sense of contact with the outside world, then they have to be rehabilitated back into an environment that they are familiar and safe with.  That's a long process.

Claudette:  How does a bird like a cockatoo, being so intelligent and smart, try to adapt to a cage?  Do they get depressed?  What happens to them psychologically over time?

Lynette:  A lot of research has been done, though probably not enough, but wildlife organisations have rehabilitation facilities where birds can go to learn to find their food again and learn to socialise with other birds again.  Some birds have never walked on the earth, seen sunshine or walked up a tree to find a hollow to sleep in, so these are all the natural instincts that must be relearnt.

Claudette:  What are your thoughts on caged bird rescue?  I mean it's been quite rampant in Sydney over the years.

Lynette:  Yes it has been for a number of years now.  After a particularly famous rescue was made public a few years ago, there was overwhelming public support for the action.  One quote in a Sydney paper said:  "Hooray for Hector and his saviour.  It was a joy to read he is at last able to enjoy a more natural life in a large enclosure and in the company of other birds."

Claudette:  It's sickening to watch a bird in a cage because the cage is so pathetically small.

Lynette:  That's right.  And there are regulations that are meant to be policed by the RSPCA and the National Parks & Wildlife Services, such as minimum cage requirements, but even this doesn't give the bird any quality of life whatsoever.

Claudette:  What's the ideal situation to all of this?

Lynette:  Cages must cease to be sold for home ownership of birds.  The only reason a person needs a cage is to transport or care for an injured bird.  I'd like to see the practice of caged birds totally abolished.  We have no right to imprison a bird for its entire life and to be separated from its own species.

Claudette:  There's a big campaign happening soon against the pet shop industry including the sale of birds in cages and against breeders.

Lynette:  The problem with people selling and trading birds is this is done simply for the money.  These people have no idea what a Duty of Care is and it is not enforced by the regulatory bodies.  They don't educate their customers so they are dismissive of the implications of what they are doing.  And that's why this continues.  The time will come, because of public opinion, when caged birds 'owners' will be forced to be accountable and take responsibility for what they are doing.  What these people are doing is simply keeping animals alive with no quality of life and if they consider it's in the best interests of the bird then they are wrong.  As Thomas Hardy said in The Blinded Bird, they are "… Enjailed in pitiless wire".