Yesterday we posted an article on the Monk Parakeet Myiopsitta monachus. Originally native to subtropical and temperate South America, Monk Parakeets now occur widely as an exotic throughout the United States - and there are even colonies in parts of Europe. How they got to these far-flung sites appear to be the result of a combination of deliberate releases and accidental escapes, but there are now many well-established feral populations and the species is thriving - much to the delight of some people, and to the irritation of others (eg officials of the US Dept of Agriculture, some Public Utility companys which have torn down nests from utility poles in the past, and a few doomsayers determined that Monks should be sent packing now ‘just in case’ they turn into rampaging invasives on a par with Starlings or Common Mynahs).

Steve - as he explains in the interview - takes anyone interested on Parrot Safaris in Brooklyn but doesn’t charge for the tours. He spends a great deal of time and money convincing his fellow Brooklynites to look again at the Monks. I was trying to think of a nice way to promote Steve’s merchandising (which is not something I’d normally do, but in this case I’m happy to make an exception) and I thought I’d illustrate this post with images taken from a beautiful calendar Steve has produced to raise funds to support his work (NB the images here have been compressed and re-sized to fit this post - the actual calendar images are larger and higher quality). If you’d like to buy a calendar, please go to http://www.cafepress.com/brooklynparrots.322010792

Steve, thanks for talking to us for our Parrot Month theme.

You work to spread awareness of New York’s population of Monk (aka Quaker) Parakeets. I read a great quote on your website (brooklynparrots.com) where you describe Monks thus: “Frankly, I think these birds deserve to be proclaimed the National Parrot of the USA. They have all of the great qualities we associate with the American character: they’re industrious, loyal to each other, they’re amazing little engineers, they coexist well with other native birds, and they just won’t give up, even when the deck is stacked against them.” You really admire them don’t you?

• SB: Yes, I do find their story inspiring. In a surreal way, they parallel the experience of many immigrants to North America in terms of them not really wanting to come here (their ancestors were captured and sold into the pet trade), but making the best of it once they arrived. They’ve also faced a lot of persecution in the U.S.A.: everybody from powerful government agencies to energy and utility companies seems to have declared war on them at some point in time. Even a lot of “bird people” don’t like them, regarding them as biological garbage – I suppose because their ancestors weren’t here at the time of the Pilgrims – and they’ve been called all sorts of nasty names (“illegal avian,” “invasive species,” “dangerous species.”) Still, they persevere, just like every ethnic group that’s come to the U.S.A., been forced to fight its way past prejudice, until it could finally lay claim to its slice of the American Dream. What could be more inspiring than that?

It also says on your website that you’ve taken it upon yourself to spread the word about what you call “one of the great natural wonders of New York”. Do you remember the trigger that made you decide you wanted to ‘take it upon’ yourself to do this?

• SB: There is actually quite a bit of a back story here. In late 2004, I was extremely depressed, both by the outcome of the presidential election but especially by the death of my father, Carl R. Baldwin. One day, while crossing Central Park (I wanted to show my daughter and her boyfriend Strawberry Fields, because she’s a big Beatles fan but had never seen it), I heard shouts of protests coming from across the park. Being an old “sixties” person, I immediately was drawn to the protest, and within minutes found out what it was about: the eviction of the two hawks Pale Male and Lola from the expensive condo building that they had chosen to nest on. Some billionaire had decided that the hawks didn’t belong, and for reasons that I can’t really explain this situation was just too much to bear. So even though it was very cold, we all stayed on the protest line all day, and I came back the next day, and just about every night after that. We shouted “honk for the hawks” and almost everyone driving down 5th Avenue blared their horns in solidarity with us. The rain poured and the snow fell, but we stood there, night after night, and ultimately we won the battle. It was just the most amazing experience and I met some wonderful people there, including E.J. McAdams, the head of the New York Audubon Society, Marie Winn (who wrote the book on Pale Male and Lola), Lincoln Karim, another Pale Male fan who’s recorded the hawks’ activities for years on his site, PaleMale.com, [which has some stunning photos on it by the way] and many other good people. It was wonderful to be a part of a winning team but of course there was a bit of a letdown when our spunky protest had to end.

  With the Great Hawk Nest Controversy of 2004 behind me, I suppose I was looking for something else to do involving urban birds, and it turned out to be the parrots. I think I first learned about them on the Web: Eleanore Miele, a professor at Brooklyn College, had done some early population studies of the parrots there and she’d put up some pretty good maps online. So I went out to the College one day, and was amazed by the robust, chattering colony I found there. In fact, I went back to report my findings to some of the “hawk people” I had met on the protest line, but I was a bit disappointed by their lack of interest. One of them even told me, “if it’s not happening in Central Park, I’m not interested.” I found this attitude to be very parochial. In fact I was really quite angry that the same Manhattan-centric attitude that I’ve seen so much of in my life extended to bird people! At that moment, I decided that it didn’t matter if the high-falutin’ bird people of Central Park didn’t care about the parrots of Brooklyn. I was going to pay attention to them, and this attention quickly manifested itself into the website brooklynparrots.com and the free monthly tours that I do.

Great story! Incidentally, have you always been interested in parrots?

• SB: Yes, I have been interested in parrots for a long time. When I was a teenager, I owned (or was owned by) an African Gray, and spending years with this parrot taught me how intelligent, emotional, and social they are.

And now you’re involved with hundreds of Monk Parakeets. Have Brooklyn’s parrots taken over your life to a large extent now?

• SB: They definitely have influenced my behaviour, including my decision to live in Brooklyn on a permanent basis. Although I’ve lived in Brooklyn several times in the past few decades, it was always a place that I was eager to get away from as soon as possible. I suppose this attitude stemmed from my experiences here as a youth: I grew up in Manhattan and it seemed every time I visited Brooklyn, something bad happened. I’ve been mugged in Brooklyn Heights, chased by gangs with knives in Coney Island, and roughed up several times in Boerum Hill. When I lived here briefly in the 1980s, there were a lot of drive-by shootings in my neighbourhood.

  But things change. Brooklyn is a lot safer than it was in the old days, I’m much more “street smart,” and after I started visiting the parrots regularly, it occurred to me that my life would be easier if I moved closer to them. So it was actually on one of my trips to see them in Bay Ridge that I happened to step into a local realtor’s office, and decided to move here full-time. So the parrots did have a major impact on my life in this respect.

  But no, the wild parrots haven’t taken over my life. But I think that a captive Quaker parrot probably would. I boarded one recently for a few months: he was a little guy who had flown into a woman’s window, she couldn’t keep him, and so naturally I offered to help out until a permanent home could be arranged. This bird was amazing, but very very demanding of attention. He was fascinating to be with and relate to, but was a real handful. Now I understand fully why some owners of Quaker Parrots claim to be “owned by” the parrot, instead of the other way round. Fortunately, I was able to pair him up with a nice couple who had rescued another Quaker elsewhere in Brooklyn. The two Quakers are now getting along famously, I’m told.

Most people go through life looking for a cause that they really believe in, can get really passionate about (I know I did). Is this yours or is that a little simplistic?

• SB: I can’t really say that I went looking for a cause to be passionately interested in. It may sound mystical but I think the cause “finds you,” but it can’t find you until you’re ready. I know that I was ready for such a cause in 2004 because of what was going on in my life. I think of myself as very lucky that “the parrots found me.” To tell you the truth, I’m still not sure why this happened, and I may never know. But maybe there was a moving finger somewhere that happened to land on the Great Graph of Fate in which the lines “Steve Baldwin” and “Wild Quaker Parrots” intersected, and drew an “X” on that intersection. I know this all sounds very mystical but that’s the best way that I can sum it up.

Nothing wrong with a bit of mysticism, IMHO, Steve! You lead many tours - Parrot Safaris - into Brooklyn to show New Yorkers the Monks living in their neighbourhood: what’s the general reaction of people maybe understanding for the first time what the Monks are doing here and what they need to survive.

• SB: I’ve had a very diverse group of people attend the Safaris. Many are just casually interested in the parrots and seem more interested in what I guess I’d call “weird urban phenomena.” Others are hard-core birdwatchers, and some are parrot owners (either Quakers or some other variety) who are intrigued by the idea that these wild parrot flocks exist. But I can say that the shared experience is universal delight at seeing them for the first time. Folks are amazed by the enormous nests that the birds build, and seeing them in action often brings a lot of smiles and laughs, because their antics (which often include arguing, squabbling, and sometimes overly affectionate behaviour between mates) are so engaging.

  A couple of years ago, an elderly couple came on one of the Safaris. They didn’t say much during the tour, but afterward, the man told me that his wife suffered from a clinical depression, and that she had smiled for the first time in five years when she saw the parrots for the first time. “Wow,” I thought, “that’s powerful. In fact, if Pfizer or Merck could find a way to bottle this experience, they’d probably sell a billion bottles a year.” On the other hand, my attitude is that it’s really best if nobody, certainly not myself, tries to commercialize the parrot-watching experience. That’s why the tours are and will always be free, although folks can bring donations for the parrot in the form of bird food. I do sell some T-shirts, coffee mugs, and calendars with photos I’ve taken of the parrots from my website, and doing this offsets some of my costs, but the tours should be free, because the parrots are free!

I’m assuming that not everyone shares your view of these ‘little green parrots’: is it difficult to understand why not?

• SB: I suppose it’s always difficult to understand and empathize with those who oppose a cause one passionately believes in. But I do try to build common ground with those who, for perfectly understandable reasons, regard the parrots as a nuisance. Especially in the case of the utility companies, which have a solemn duty to deliver reliable power, and don’t want to be in the “parrot management business.” I actually find myself on the same side as these companies in some cases, because nobody really wants to see the parrots nesting on power lines when there are alternatives (e.g. artificial nesting platforms). What does cause me to go ballistic is when these companies do really cruel things, such as killing the birds without pursuing humane alternatives. This happened in Connecticut a few years ago and was going on in Florida as well. The impulse to kill animals when there are humane alternatives available is something that I suppose I’ll never understand or endorse. At the same time, I do my best not to demonize such people. Chances are they’re not evil, just ignorant of the fact that there’s no need to resort to such measures.

Can you explain to any doubters out there why Monk Parakeets are not the South American version of the unloved European Starling?

• SB: Well, first off, they don’t displace native species the way starlings do. Starlings are little monsters in terms of being very aggressive in evicting native birds from their lairs. I’ve not observed any aggressive behaviour on the part of the parrots towards other bird species (although they sometimes fight among themselves). Nor have they multiplied the way that the starlings have. In biological terms, parrots are K-strategists, not R-strategists such as starlings. So I don’t think there are many parallels here.

You must hear, “These aren’t native birds why should we protect/look after them” fairly regularly though. Do you have an answer you usually give (or does it depend on what sort of mood you’re in)?

• SB: Yes, people sometimes say this, or a variant, which is “they don’t belong here.” Well, by that logic, the only people we should be protecting or looking after are the direct descendants of the Native Americans who predated the Europeans in the U.S.A. The “nativist” argument is, sadly, very much active, even among folks who should know better. I think the head of the New Jersey Audubon Society memorably said a few years ago that “there’s only one answer to the monk parakeet problem: send them back to Argentina!” If monks were causing real problems vis a vis other species I’d feel differently. But there’s little or no evidence supporting the idea that their presence here is causing any ecological problems.

  I have learned how important language is in this debate. People who don’t like the parrots always trot out the “invasive species” label. Well, that’s lumping the parrots with some truly dangerous creatures such as the Asian Longhorn Beetle. The term “introduced species” is much more appropriate, and by the way, many or most of the birds we find in North American cities, including sparrows, pigeons, and starlings, are introduced, and they’ve been here for years.

Is ’spreading the word’ something you can see yourself having to do for many more years or do you think eventually most people will come to accept these new birds in their midst?

• SB: I think the efforts that have been made to publicize the existence of the parrots have caused the public to have a little more respect for them. And it would be great for us all to “rest on our laurels.” But it’s almost a Cold War-type situation here. The parrots and humans will coexist peacefully for a while, but then all of a sudden they’ll be a major offensive by one side (and it’s always the human side) on the other. At this point, one must organize one’s forces, ride into the breach, and mount a counter-offensive in the realm of public opinion. I’m very happy that about 1,400 people have joined my electronic mailing list, because I can instantly telegraph them with news (either good or bad) about what’s happening with the flocks. One never knows when it will be necessary to “raise the alarm!”

You’ve placed many videos on sites like You Tube and Brooklyn Parrots is a great example of a multimedia website. You’re obviously very comfortable using “new media”. Has it made much of a difference to your campaign, and would you recommend other ‘citizen conservationists’ use as many different media as possible to get their message out?

• SB: I’m fortunate because I’ve been building web sites and doing interactive stuff for 15 years now, so I’m comfortable with it. On the other hand, one doesn’t really need that much experience to put up a convincing web site, produce and upload a video, or organize an online community today: the tools are so much easier to use than the tools of a few years ago.

  There’s no question in my mind that the Web constitutes a genuine, once-in-a-lifetime communications revolution, and that conservationists need to embrace it. My one word of advice is to be patient. Unless you have a lot of money to spend on promotion, it can take quite a long time for a site to achieve influence. For me, brooklynparrots.com started out as a labor of love, and it remains so. It’s great to make a few dollars from product sales or advertising but this revenue is far too small to support an actual business. But the “psychic income” from doing this kind of work is incalculably great. Maybe there are only 10,000 people in the world who really care about Monk Parakeets but sites like my own have the power to reach a significant share of this audience easily. And the same goes for any conservationist working to protect a particular species or particular environment.

Can we just talk a little about the ecology of the Monks. The Monks in NY must be the most northerly population of parrots in the world. How do they survive the NY winter, which I know from personal experience can be very harsh indeed?

• Interestingly, the monks in NY aren’t actually the northernmost. There was a colony in Montreal that survived for many years (I’m not sure if it’s still viable), and this is far to the north of New York. There is also a sizable, thriving colony in Chicago, a city whose winters are legendary for being savage. The parrots live right on Lake Michigan, one of the coldest, windiest places I can think of.

  But yes, the monks in New York do have to endure some harsh winters. How do they do it? Well, their enormous, well-built, well-insulated nests afford them protection against the cruel winds. Those parrots enterprising enough to build structures adjacent to certain electrical infrastructure, including power transformers, high-voltage insulators, and lighting towers get an added benefit because this equipment is often warm.

  Their diet is also key. Monks are classified as “plant generalists,” which means they eat a lot of different plants, including grass, weeds, leaf buds, and any kind of bird food found in feeders, including corn, suet, sunflower seeds, finch seed, etc. I’ve even seen them eating pizza crusts from the street. All of these foods are available during the winter in New York. Even the grass is edible right now in January, so long as there is no snow cover.

Have they adapted their diet much?

• SB: I’m not familiar enough with what they eat in Argentina to say whether they’ve changed their diet significantly. What I do know is they display an amazingly varied diet. Interestingly, monks in captivity are often very finicky about the foods they prefer. Their wild cousins, however, seem to have cast-iron stomachs!

Typical of most city-dwellers then! Are they actually spreading into the ‘city proper’ or staying within parks and large open spaces?

• SB: Because they are mainly grass-eaters, they do benefit from proximity to grassy areas, and proximity to trees, both to eat the buds from and also for harvesting nest construction materials (twigs). I know of a few monks who have tried to build nests in Manhattan, but the nesting opportunities are limited, because there are very few open green areas and very few structures (such as above ground power transmission poles or stadium light towers) available for nesting purposes. Brooklyn, on the other hand, is sort of a paradise for them. Plenty of trees, a fair amount of green space, and nest-friendly infrastructure all abound.

Is there data available to show whether the population is growing or have organised surveys not taken place?

• SB: The Audubon Society counts all the birds in New York State each year, so I think they would have the best data showing any historical population trends. Unfortunately, I don’t have access to such data. It might be online, but I wasn’t able to find it. I’d reckon that the population in Brooklyn is about 200-400 birds.

That’s not really enough to have a huge impact on the environment. What do you say to those people who claim that Monks are potentially ‘agricultural pests’ and should be culled before they get too populous?

• Nobody’s actually ever said that to me in Brooklyn, I suppose because the only crops that anyone maintains in Brooklyn are marijuana plants, and these crops are grown indoors! But I’ve heard the claim voiced elsewhere. To my knowledge, there is no evidence in the U.S.A. of any crop damage caused by monk parakeets, because the birds typically stick to urban/suburban areas. So I think the concept of “anticipatory culling” is absurdly premature. If it turns out that monks someday are seen to cause genuine harm to agriculture somewhere, well, I suppose that trapping might be necessary. But I don’t think we’re anywhere near this scenario now.

And how do you respond to people who say that you’re not a scientist and that your views - though laudable - are not based on science? I only ask because I get told regularly that though what I write on 10,000 Birds is good etc, I ought to stay out of anything to do with ’science’ as I’m not trained as a scientist…

• SB: No, I’m not a scientist. I suppose I regard myself as an interpreter of a certain phenomena (wild parrot flocks in Brooklyn) who tries to incorporate as many relevant lenses on this phenomena as I can. Such lenses include the scientific, the political, and even the mythic, urban/historical, and spiritual. If a scientist wants to upbraid me or correct me for something I’ve said or written about the parrots, great – I’ll correct it! Science – at least in my mind – is about discovery, not dogma. And there’s a lot we don’t know about the monk parakeet, and parrots generally, and I welcome any exchanges with scientists that they’d like to initiate.

Other populations of Monks in North America face the same problems that yours do. Are there any plans for like-minded conservation groups to link up and press for legislation to protect them?

• SB: Most of the regulations affecting the monks are state regulations which were promulgated during the period of legislative hysteria following the parrots first appearances here. And all of the controversies so far are very local in nature. The Quaker Parrot Society has done a good job building a national network of pro-Quaker people, many of whom are active in local issues involving the parrots. I do what I can to help publicize any local battles, bringing them to the attention of my far-flung network, but at the same time, I have to really defer to “the locals” when it comes to actually fighting the battle. There might come a time when there’s a national legislative issue affecting the monks, and at that point I might have to re-gear to provide a different coordinating role, and it might make more sense to actually build a national network, or at least a network across those 14 states where the monks now live.

‘Success’ is difficult to quantify, but what would have to happen in terms of legislation or public awareness for you to feel that you’d been successful in your campaign?

• SB: It’s hard to define because the history of the monks in North America is a history filled with skirmishes and no “perpetual truce” is likely to be declared by either side. I know that I feel good about “spreading the word” about these wonderful parrots because I’m convinced that it becomes much harder to do cruel things to a creature that people – a lot of people – feel sympathy for. But I’ll probably go to my grave feeling that I haven’t finished this job, and that’s fine with me, as long as I can pass the torch – or at least the binoculars – on to someone willing to carry on.

We have a great many visitors who live in North America. For anyone who wants to help you protect the Monk Parakeets, what do you suggest they do?

• SB: Right now, at least in Brooklyn, the situation is looking favourable. In fact, New York City Councilman Tony Avella plans to introduce a resolution affording the monks some basic protections against cruel treatment and poaching, which is great news. People seem to have woken up to the fact that these free-range parrots are something very special, and that we should treat them with a basic level of respect. But things can change quickly in this world, and I’m certain that there will be future instances – perhaps not in Brooklyn but elsewhere where the monks reside – when the parrots and humans will again collide. At this point, it may be necessary to do some letter-writing, some petitioning, and perhaps some old-fashioned street protests. So the saying of abolitionist Wendell Phillips that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” applies directly to the situation of free-range parrots in the U.S.A.

  There are also some wonderful organizations that have done good work in terms of providing rescue and rehabbing services for monks displaced and/or injured by nest removal efforts, including Foster Parrots LLC (www.fosterparrots.com), and the Quaker Parakeet Society (www.qp-society.com).

Steve, many thanks for talking to us, best of luck with your campaign, and if we can help in any way you know where we are…

• SB: Thanks for the opportunity to communicate with you!

We at The Brooklyn Parrot Society have a trusted partnership with We-Care.com. Your purchase through this site helps us conserve and protect wild Quaker Parrots in the Northeastern United States. The organization’s activities include Wild Parrot Safaris designed to increase knowledge about wild Quaker Parrots living in urban areas within this region. http://brooklynparrots.we-care.com