FINCHforum

Dylan, has obviously done extensive reading on the subject. I find the information in his article very interesting, and very good reading.

Here are some of my own personal thoughts on the subject.

I find myself thinking, that although we can produce different hybrids/breeds of birds, dogs, cats, etc. that does not in my mind make these creatures MAN MADE. We can manipulate genes, and even produce clones, but we still have to have the original creature to start off with, right?

Would we have the fierce Chihuahua of today, if Nature had not created the Wolf in the first place? Would we have the soft fuzzy fat kitty slumbering in our lap, had Nature not first created the Wild Cat? Would we have the different colours, body shapes, songs, etc. of the Canary, had Spanish sailors not brought them over from the Canary islands, where they had existed way before man arrived and 'discovered them' ?

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that yes we can manipulate, breed, develope, improve (or not) and produce all sorts of creatures, but.....

Show me a Man, who can MAKE a bird and so be able to call it a "Man made Bird".

Sheather

Similar to what you were saying about canaries, many factory-farmed chickens are also more aggressive. Many lines of egg-laying chickens were kept in battery cages for a large percentage of their recent history, and were bred with little regard for temperament. This is part of the reason why some lines of egg-laying chickens cannot be housed cage-free without killing each other. Feather-pluckers are also rather common, but this seems to be a result of SEEKING, rather than true aggression (and therefore can be reduced with environmental enrichment in the form of string and scratch).

There was also a period around the 1980s where some chickens could only be bred via artificial insemination. Certain lines of roosters lost the ability to perform a courtship dance, so the hens would refuse to mate with them. It seemed that people then started breeding the roosters to be more aggressive, thinking that those behaviors indicated a higher sex drive. These roosters would then rape, injure, and sometimes kill the females due to increased aggression and the lack of proper courtship.

This, along with a plethora of other information, is detailed in Temple Grandin's book Animals Make Us Human. I highly recommend it if you're interested in animal psychology.

As soon as you said "seeking" I was going to mention her! I have read all of her works and found them very interesting.

Sheather

All of the above, quite fascinating. Thanks for taking all the time to put that together! The evolution of the domestic chicken....that is simply WOW! -)

Dylan, I could read your studies all day and get beautifully lost in the "awe" of it. Thank you SO much for this!

Sheather

Ah, I see. I've read all of her books that I've gotten my hands on, which comes out to the sad total of three. I'll keep searching for the other ones, though!

Show me a Man, who can MAKE a bird and so be able to call it a "Man made Bird".

Here, Elana. I present to you, a truly MAN MADE bird!

Sheather

Oh honey, you are priceless.... .

lovezebs@Sheather

Elana, I agree with you 100%. Very nice post

Dylan, that was too funny

lovezebs wrote: Show me a Man, who can MAKE a bird and so be able to call it a "Man made Bird".

http://wiki.c2.com/?LaynesLaw

Before we can discuss what is or is not man made, we must first agree on a definition of what "man made" means. At which point, all further classifications are axiomatic. Unless, of course, you have your own definition (such as physically making a bird without parents, as Elana proposed )

In my opinion, "man made bird", or more generally "man made animal" would be one that is created through selective breeding. ie. Pairs that wouldn't breed naturally in the wild (through line breeding, for example). By this definition, almost every mutation of domesticated birds are "man made" in that they wouldn't persist in the wild. We, as humans, determined it looked more attractive, not the animals/birds themselves. Furthermore, looks aren't the only thing considered. Personality, demeanor, etc., are also considered when we, as humans, choose pairs for breeding.

With this definition, one could argue that every variation of the "kitchen canary" is "man made".

Rob wrote:

lovezebs wrote: Show me a Man, who can MAKE a bird and so be able to call it a "Man made Bird".

http://wiki.c2.com/?LaynesLaw

Before we can discuss what is or is not man made, we must first agree on a definition of what "man made" means. At which point, all further classifications are axiomatic. Unless, of course, you have your own definition (such as physically making a bird without parents, as Elana proposed )

In my opinion, "man made bird", or more generally "man made animal" would be one that is created through selective breeding. ie. Pairs that wouldn't breed naturally in the wild (through line breeding, for example). By this definition, almost every mutation of domesticated birds are "man made" in that they wouldn't persist in the wild. We, as humans, determined it looked more attractive, not the animals/birds themselves. Furthermore, looks aren't the only thing considered. Personality, demeanor, etc., are also considered when we, as humans, choose pairs for breeding.

With this definition, one could argue that every variation of the "kitchen canary" is "man made".

Spot on, couldn't agree more, well said

This is such a interesting topic. There are so many opinions and also excellent articles to read ! There are many different opinions. It is absolutely wonderful to have such a nice forum that everyone can voice their opinions and not be judged or rudely criticized.