Monk parakeets' fate in judge's hands
KEN DIXON
Animal lovers call them a colorful part of the urban ecology, but the United Illuminating Co. wants a state judge to declare Connecticut’s monk parakeet population a tenacious threat to public health and safety.
The utility claims the company’s most-effective way to deal with the stick nests that some parrot colonies build on utility poles was the capture-and-slaughter program that sparked controversy, protests and worldwide interest in fall 2005.
During the first two days of a Superior Court trial in New Haven last week, a UI lawyer asked Judge Trial Referee Anthony V. DeMayo to rule that the regional utility can resume the kill tactics.
The Darien-based Friends of Animals Inc., which brought the lawsuit against UI more than two years ago, wants DeMayo to issue an injunction so the eradication, which claimed about 185 monk parakeets in 2005, stops permanently.
“I think UI’s waiting for the kind of ruling they want here and they’re going to start killing these birds right and left,” said Priscilla Feral, president of the international animal-rights advocacy group, after the second day of evidence on Thursday.
Feral noted that a sworn deposition of a UI official last year indicated that the electric monopoly has bigger problems with squirrels causing power outages than it does from monk parakeets, South American natives that have thrived along Connecticut’s coast for nearly 40 years.
“This company has contempt for them,” Feral said. “They were compared to cockroaches and rats. They are keen on wiping them out of this environment.”
A UI spokesman declined comment on Friday, citing that the trial is still under way. Jonathan M. Freiman, UI’s lead lawyer from the New Haven firm of Wiggin & Dana, stressed that the capture program was approved in a 2003 state law that labeled the monk parakeets as invasive and allowed for the roundup.
Under the 2005 program, UI linesmen climbed poles under cover of darkness, netted the green birds and turned them over, stunned, to waiting crews from the federal Department of Agriculture for immediate asphyxiation and death.
Freiman said the nests can reach 6 feet in height and the flammable sticks weigh hundreds of pounds. He said that “dozens” of power outages have been linked to the nests.
Freiman criticized an alternative-nesting scheme — approved by the FOA — as being generally ineffective, since only two of about 14 man-made nesting platforms have attracted permanent parrot colonies.
“They just want a blanket injunction against the capture of monk parakeets, notwithstanding the fact that the Legislature has made it that the monk parakeets can be caught and can be killed when they constitute a threat to public health and public safety.” Freiman said during his opening statement on Wednesday.
“There’s no other reasonable way to solve the problem, the problem, of course is flammable nests on the high-voltage electrical equipment,” Freiman said.
He described the proponents of the alternative nesting platforms as “some earnest and well-meaning people talking about things they built in their back yard, about dreams that they have, about hopes that they have about other ways to solve the problem.” During the cross-examination Thursday of a Waterbury woman who witnessed a Nov. 18, 2005, seizure-and-euthanasia incident, Freiman was able to illustrate the tenacity of the birds, the only species of parrot that build stick nests.
On May 1, UI crews tore down several nests near Long Island Sound on West Haven’s Ocean Avenue.
By May 18, the birds were well under way toward substantially rebuilding each of the nests — with more sticks gathered from the neighborhood — 18 feet or higher in the exact same utility poles.
During cross-examination of the FOA’s main witness, Dwight G. Smith, chairman of the biology department at Southern Connecticut State University, Freiman got the monk parakeet expert to admit that only a small fraction of the birds will choose another spot to nest after their homes in utility poles are torn down.
“Taking down the nests is a reasonable and prudent alternative if you don’t kill the birds.” said Smith, a Ph.D. who has taught at SCSU for nearly 40 years and tracked the parrot population since 1992.
Smith, who with under-graduate and graduate students has studied colonies throughout the state and New York and New Jersey, said that repeated nest teardowns have not been attempted often enough to see what it takes to eventually force the parrots elsewhere.
Smith said his numerous attempts to work with UI on the issue were ignored by company officials.
Many of the thousands of Connecticut monk parakeets, which are native to Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay, nest in trees. The birds have been found in about 20 states, including a sizable colony in Chicago.
Most colonies are located within a mile-and-a-half of Long Island Sound in single pairs to a eight pairs per nest, from Greenwich to New London, Smith said. He said they have a significant role in the urban and suburban ecology and are prey for hawks.
“They are part of the habitat they occupy,” Smith said. “I would argue an important part of the habitat.” The green birds, also called Quaker parrots for the apparent capes around their shoulders, are about a foot long and can live 20 years. The oral history of the birds’ path to this region has the first immigrants escaping from a broken crate at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York around 1967 or 1968 and flying across the Sound to Bridgeport.
“They’re colorful, charismatic and a great many people take delight in their antics,” said FOA lawyer Danielle B. Omasta, of the Manchester law firm of Beck & Eldergill. She said that for UI to win its case, the law requires that UI show “in all instances” that parrots nesting in utility poles create health and safety hazards.
“They’re a plaintiff,” Freiman countered. “They’re seeking an injunction. They have to show there is no threat to public health and public safety.”
During Smith’s testimony on Wednesday, DeMayo, who had been assigned the case that morning, picked up a photo of a monk parakeet and smiled.
“One could easily argue that one would like a lot of these things hopping around your backyard,” said the jurist. “But that’s not what we’re really here for.”
“All I can say is they’re an extremely likable species,” Smith said. “People enjoy watching them. They enjoy seeing tropical species in action.”
In November 2005, UI suddenly began the roundup and slaughter of birds in more than 100 nests on UI poles located in West Haven, Milford and Stratford, but the campaign was suspended amid a public outcry.
During the first day of the trial, Freiman continually attempted to poke holes in the FOA case and Smith’s opinions. At one point, Freiman wouldn’t even acknowledge that the federal authorities killed the birds back in 2005.
“Whatever the USDA did after they were turned over, I don’t know and can’t stipulate,” Freiman said. The utility — facing an initial suit by the FOA and promises by members of the Connecticut General Assembly to change the 2003 designation of the birds as pests — then promised to limit the operations to tearing down the nests and letting the birds fly away.
But the 2006 General Assembly failed to change the law and bills to that effect were not pursued in 2007 and 2008.
In 2006 and 2007, UI had autumn nest teardowns in an agreement not to disrupt the spring nesting season, but this year’s spring campaign resulted in egg breakage, Feral charged, adding that the FOA has at least two eggs from upset nests.
She said that while UI let the nests grow for years through deferred maintenance, it has invested a lot over the last two years preparing for the court case.
“They mad as hell and they’re not going to be content until they eliminate those birds from Connecticut’s environment,” Feral said. “The question is whether we’re going to let them get away with it.” The case resumes in DeMayo’s courtroom on Wednesday.
Post your comment
Comment Guidelines: We welcome your expressions of opinion on this subject. Please avoid false commentary about individuals or groups. Facts must be verified by the person posting. Off-topic comments, and comments inappropriate for a readership of all ages, may be deleted. E-mail addresses will never be published. Only comments with valid e-mail address will be published.
40 Comments
On May 25, 2008, dave murray wrote:
I live in West Haven Ct. and have seen the nests and taken pictures.In one area there is a house and a pole with a nest that they built on a platform that someone put up. I believe they should live. I HOPE FoA WINS IN COURT.
On May 27, 2008, joan kempf wrote:
I live in Edgewater NJ and we have had these parrots with nests all over and very few people object to them. they are lovely little noisy creatures…
On May 27, 2008, Katherine Cech wrote:
Why is it that with every problem people have with animals the only solution people can ever come up with is death of the animals?? Are we not intelligent enough to come up with better solutions don’t animals don’t have to die…or do we just simply not care? I think we all know what the answer to that is.
When the prairie dogs were proclaimed a nuisance to ranchers and others in Colorado, the innocent and helpless prairie dogs were poisoned in their burrows. What a terrible way to die!! And this was sanctioned and performed by the various government agencies. When enough people raised a loud stink about killing so many prairie dogs, and especially in such an atrocious way, these governmental agencies were pressured into trapping and relocating them to other areas. If this company doesn’t like the parakeets, then they ought to be ordered to trap and relocate them. The birds are alive and UI wouldn’t have to deal with them anymore. Other solutions are available if people just show some care and compassion.
[Blog editors’ note: If UI focused on maintaining their poles, tearing down nests when essential ,and outside wintery conditions and breeding season, that would be a solution. UI needs to keep their hands off the parakeets. Connecticut has plenty of room for 1,000 or more beautiful birds.
On May 27, 2008, Michael Pfau wrote:
Dear Judge DeMayo, Please protect these lovely creatures. Have UI … leave them alone. Thank you, Michael Pfau
On May 27, 2008, tristan wrote:
There would be more habitat for these so called transplanted species if that other transplanted and invasive species called humans would stop stealing non human’s habitats.
Inspite of being invasive, no one has as yet opted for culling the human herd.
On May 27, 2008, Neil Kaye wrote:
I live in South Florida, where we also are fortunate enough to have a population of Monk parakeets. They are colorful, fun, noisy creatures that can often be seen hanging out in the trees at the beach, or streaking across the sky hollering at the top of their lungs! Any minor inconvenience they may cause pales in comparison to the joy they give to those of us who love to watch them. And don’t they have a right to live just because they are alive? It seems that as a race, human’s answer to anything is to kill. Can’t we come up with a better, more compassionate solution?!?!?!
On May 27, 2008, Ellen Strauss wrote:
Number one: No one has the right to destroy a life so destruction of the birds is off the table.
Alternatives have to be found to discourage the birds from building their nests on the utility poles and create an attractive alternative.
Who is responsible for the alternatives:
The utility company is responsible to create alternatives with the help of conservationists and bird breeding experts.
Suggestions:
I. Instead of destroying the nests, relocate them. 2. Use a distraction , whether sound , visual, etc to discourage nesting on the poles.
On May 27, 2008, Priscilla Feral wrote:
Alert on writing judges: Please don’t. One can opine here on FoA’s blog, but judges are not allowed to consider ex parte communications (your written appeals to them). They only serve to irritate judges, so please don’t write the judge.
Also, we can’t overstate the obvious: Monk parakeets do not need to be captured, relocated or killed.
Thank you for supporting FoA’s efforts to protect these lovely birds from the monstrous behavior of United Illuminating.
On May 27, 2008, Barry wrote:
It seems to me that United Illuminating is more of a threat to co-existence than the parakeets are. This is just another example of human stupidity. If any living, feeling being gets in the way. murder it! It’s the way that human animals have behaved since the Dark Ages. The real illumination has to occur in the collective psyche of human beings. We share this planet with every other living being. It’s past time that we get on with the sharing.
On May 27, 2008, Katherine Ryan wrote:
It is amazing that in the 21st century , too often the only solution is still to kill off anything that we don’t like or annoys us, The animals have just as much right to live on this planet and to have peace as we do. We should be doing everything humanely to help these poor little creatures as we should for all innocent life. It’s disgraceful that humans continue to want to control everything. Maybe the parakeets are annoyed with us! We should set an example if we are suppose to be far more superior than animals. We seem to fall short of that too often. How anyone can justify killing a defenseless animal is beyond me!!We should spend our time and energy on fixing the real problems of the world or would that take too much time and energy. We can’t even figure out how to not depend on gasoline and find better ways for transportation!
On May 27, 2008, Peter Hood wrote:
UI continues to disgrace the very name of man itself: management invokes man’s worst and most predjudicial solution, which is to kill. I walk large sections of Tunxis Hill daily, and UI seemingly insists (and the Town of Fairfield moves in lockstep) that there be no trees in town, lest they grow anywhere near power lines. I would be happy to endure the noise and inconvenience of the birds if they chose to nest near me: instead, UI prefers to kill to resolve an inconvenience. It makes me ashamed to have them as our utility provider.
On May 27, 2008, Rhys Atkinson wrote:
I agree that one solution would be to remove the nests on the power lines that pose a threat. I live in the Black Rock secion of Bridgeport and we have multiple nests in the area. Most are in trees with only one or two on a power line. If they monitored the building of the nests and took them down immediately the problem would be solved.
The UI wants the easiest, most cost efficient solution. If they totally eradicate the birds, then they don’t have to monitor the nests….shame on them!
On May 27, 2008, Robin Roraback wrote:
The parakeets should be left alone. There should be other, more kind solutions than killing these birds. Cruelly killing them is not the answer. I hope FOA wins this battle.
On May 27, 2008, Hugh Yaeger wrote:
Utilities belong underground. This would make the problem mute. Granted that this is an expensive and long-term project, but a permanent one and humane.
On May 27, 2008, Greer Ashton wrote:
How long must any introduced species (accidentally or purposely)exist before it is considered native to an area?
What a shame that killing is always considered the only option when it comes to wildlife “interfering” with the only species on earth that is truly overpopulated!
On May 27, 2008, Linda Gavitt wrote:
There has to be a better way to handle this problem. We can’t just kill everything in our paths that we find annoying. The birds should be studied to see if there is something that can be done to make the utility poles unattractive to them - such as a low or high frequency hum. Widespread slaughter of the birds seems cruel and inhumane.
On May 27, 2008, Carolina Pueyo wrote:
Give me a Break,
threat to public health and safety? This little Bird.
I think they are the really problem .
They (these people) are hazards to the public health themselves — not these poor cute creatures. They should be ashamed, Give the money of the attorney’s fees to the people in real need.
GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
On May 27, 2008, Barbara-Jean Pearson wrote:
This is a disgusting example of corporations that think nothing of raping the natural resources, including wildlife, in pursuit of the almight dollar. If these idiots were half as smart as they think they are they would find a way to co-exist with these poor birds. It is we who are incroaching on their territory, not the other way round!
I pray God will repay these morons ten fold for destroying his creation.
On May 27, 2008, Tracy Powers wrote:
One more reason to get off grid. These big greedy utility companies are certainly more of health and safety threat than any little bird. This is appalling.
On May 27, 2008, Katherine Ryan wrote:
It’a always about money. If we did the right things to begin with it would save money and time in the long run. Humans are the greatest terrorists and predators on this earth . So many still have a problem with the death penalty for those who are evil people and admitted murderers and yet to kill an innocent bird isn’t a problem. HELLO?????? Utilities should be underground and everything should be done to help these poor little parakeets live peacefully. We owe it to do the right things on this planet for all innocent creatures. Taking care of these parakeets should be a easy effortless act of kindness.
On May 27, 2008, Atia Jarnstedt wrote:
The following is very simply stated, should be understood by all, and makes absolutely perfect sense:
“Animals also have rights. Animals also do not want to suffer. They want to be treated humanely. They want to receive love and affection. And they certainly want to live out their natural lives. They do not want to die or be killed before their natural end. This is also their right.” - Garda Ghista
On May 27, 2008, DEBBIE CAPONIGRO wrote:
The killing of these lovely birds is outrageous and totally inhumane. They are God’s creatures and should be treated with love and respect. Just another example of greedy big companies trying to eradicate the beauty of nature.
On May 27, 2008, Bunny Delgado wrote:
I’m glad to see so many comments from people who believe, as I do , that the solution to this “problem” is not the murder of these innocent creatures. When these attornies and company executives wonder why children have become violent and unconcerned with the value of life, they need look no further than their own mirrors.
On May 27, 2008, priscilla chevrette wrote:
It is beyond appalling that in the state of connecticut we have politicians who could not take care that the monk parakeet situation was handled right from the very beginning by giving the parakeets protected status - what happened to the bills put forth to do just that? Shame on all of you who have the power and failed to put an end to this travesty. Let’s call it what it is - ANIMAL CRUELTY. Hello - Audubon Society? Where are you? Does the UI own you too? The UI has never wanted to work with the experts and the many advocates of these charming birds. There is a better way & the people who are in charge at UI have the moral obligation to find it.
On May 27, 2008, Kathi McGough wrote:
Mankind has a long history of killing creatures that get in his way, including other people. In the middle ages, cats were destroyed due to superstitious belief that they were evil. This caused the rats that carried the bubonic plague carrying flea to proliferate, thus resulting in the demise of over 1/3 of the known world. We have slaughtered wolves, African wildlife and countless other creatures throughout history. The rainforest and many other ecosystems have been depleted and destroyed in the name of progress. We now have global warming, lyme disease from a proliferation of deer ticks, pollution of the air we breathe and water we drink. Our obsession with mankind’s “territorial imperative” will eventually completely destroy us. If an animal even appears to be a threat to humans, it is eliminated, but we are the biggest threat to every living creature on the face of this earth. So let’s continue with destroying innocent little birds. In the words of Pete Seger, “When will they ever learn?”
On May 27, 2008, m sager wrote:
hello i think that this utility company makes more then enought money from they customers and should and can make alternative housing and nesting for these parakeets these birds are not in anyway mean hateful killers or murderers that have attacked killed or maimed anyone or anything they are just small birds that are just following they instincts i think that these people sure use they money to persevere these birds and or any other wildlife for the furture of all of us for many many years to come i personally hope that my great great great grandchilders childers can see them to know these and all of nature in the flesh to hold feel touch in real live not just in books so instead of buying expensive toys for themselves do the right thing for all
On May 27, 2008, CKRoss wrote:
I wonder if there’s a noise repellent that would make nesting on the poles unattractive? Then set up alternatives…
On May 28, 2008, Irene Cicone wrote:
SORRY PUSHED THE WRONG BUTTON THERE AND LOST MY ORIGINAL MESSAGE WHICH WAS I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE MANY POSITIVE OPINIONS AND ALTERNATIVE MEASURES TO TAKE CARE OF THIS SITUATION INSTEAD OF KILLING THESE BEAUTIFUL BIRDS, UI SHOULD BE ASHAMED,I SHALL PRAY THE JUDGE WILL BE COMPASSIONATE, AND I SAY KUDOS TO CHRISTINE
On May 28, 2008, anne taylor wrote:
Its 2008, could we use a bit of grey matter to solve this problem. How ‘bout placing cones (wood/plaster/metal etc.) on the top of the utility poles to deter the birds. Or not…..
On May 28, 2008, Merrill Kramer wrote:
Please stop killing monk parrots….
This is not a viable solution to your “problem”..
On May 28, 2008, Marsha Siano wrote:
I think it is horrible that this utility can be allowed to persecute and kill these nice birds. They are intelligent creatures and do not deserve this euthanizing. I hope that the judge shows mercy to them, because there are other solutions that do not require killing the parakeets. If there is a petition drive of some kind, please contact me about it. I would love to lend my support.
On May 29, 2008, Kate Munson wrote:
Could someone please email me..I am looking to participate at the next monk parakeet protest.
Thank you kindly.
Kate
[Blog editors’ note: Please contact Nancy Rice at Friends of Animals: nrice@friendsofanimals.org.
Also know that we’ve prevailed in the court of public opinion and that UI is not now capturing parakeets.
Their so-called eradication efforts cost UI $125,000 to kill 185 monk parakeets in November and December of 2005. Connecticut’s statute 26-92 must be amended and strengthened in the next legislative session so that UI has no wiggle room to justify the wrongheaded killing of monk parakeets. Everyone in Connecticut should support that legislative effort and other interventions through membership support of Friends of Animals, and by pressing your State Representative and State Senator
to support a bill we’ll help draft to cure the weaknesses in the statute 26-92. Many thanks. ]
On May 30, 2008, Josephine Picone wrote:
Judge DeMayo, have a heart and realize that it is not the parrakeets fault that they are trying to find their place/home/habitat in the world. It is us humans who are to blame. We have invaded their world. I am sure there are easier means IN solving this problem other than KILLING THEM!
On May 30, 2008, Steve brennan wrote:
I think we should start removing United Illuminating employees since they are such pests. It would sure help the environment and reduce global warming if United Illuminating were not allowed to reproduce. after all they are not a natural part of the environment. I grew up in Connecticut and spent many wonderful days along long island sound birdwatching. Unfortunately, it is hard to boycott power companies since there are few alternatives available. that is why the idiot management is impervious to criticism. They have a monopoly and think they can act with impunity. Hopefully there is a god and he will take care of them in the end for their abuse of animals. then again we still have hunters who kill anything they want with impunity and no one stops that either. We are really still just barbarians.
On May 30, 2008, Steve brennan wrote:
Actually, the federal Department of Agriculture and the Fish and Wildlife Service are two of the biggest exterminators in the world. They use our tax money to kill everything from canada geese to blackbirds to wild horses to prairie dogs to bison to predators whenever anyone like golfers, or ranchers, or farmers claims to be bothered or has “damage” caused by wildlife our federal government is more than happy to gas, poison, or shoot the offending wildlife. Until our government starts protecting wildlife rather tha massacreing wildlife there is little hope for our environment and the animals that have managed to survive our eradication programs.
On June 1, 2008, Kay from New Orleans wrote:
One of the great joys after Hurricane Katrina was when the monk parakeets returned. The city was silent for quite awhile. When they returned, it signaled new life, a new beginning, a familiar sound that brought joy.
Perhaps FoA should start a letter campaign to demand that the Dept of Agriculture stop the practice of “DISPOSING” of big business’s “pests”? Once they refuse to participate in this murder, the utilities will have to assume all responsibility and the public relations nightmare that they have created.
On June 3, 2008, stephen lyda wrote:
I am a very strong christian believer when it comes to killing because it is biblically and morally wrong! God tells us in the bible NOT to kill and that means birds, animals, humans, ANY living thing. It is one of the ten commandments and should be obeyed.The people…who are killing these innocent little birds should be ashamed of themselves enough to stop the killing because everything has the right to live. I am also a lover of animals myself, including birds.
On June 4, 2008, ANONYMOUS wrote:
Killing ANIMALS is plain W-R-O-N-G. any kind of killing is wrong. I TOTALLY agree with stephan Lyda.
Thanks 4 the article……..
On June 29, 2008, True bird lover wrote:
I had a monk as a pet , he was very smart and he talked.
He was so much fun to watch and he was very lovable.
I can’t imagine people killing them. You would not believe how smart he was and how much he talked, and knew what he was saying , not just repeating , he would ask for yogurt and then say vanilla was his favorite and you could understand every word he said as clear as a human talking. Please there has to be a better way, then KILLING them. Please,they must have a purpose or God, would not have created them .
On August 22, 2008, Muriel Lord wrote:
I would very much love to see the parakeets. Could someone tell me where to find them? I went to Hammonaset Park as I heard they were there. Couldn’t find them, I live in central Ct.
FoA comments:
The UI utility company has torn down many of the nests so you may have difficulty finding them. However, the birds appear to build nest in trees and poles along the shoreline in Milford.