Pecking Order—Part 2

The usual factors that determine wild bird pecking order are size, age, hormone levels, and how much ownership of the feeder a given bird feels at the moment (its belligerency level?). As younger birds mature, or their hormone levels change, they become more likely to challenge the existing order set up by their elders (sort of like teenage kids who challenge their parents). The underlying factor that powers the whole thing is reproduction: the drive to send one's genes into the future. Those who get the lion's share of food today are most likely to stay healthy and generate offspring.

We have observed minimal physical contact at our feeder, when pecking-order jousts occur. It's mostly a case of a show of bravado—like teenage boys strutting before each other in a menacing manner. No one really wants to fight—just to force his opponent to back down, in the face of his excessive swagger. Now and then, however, we do witness a real bird battle, as the contestants go a little too far in their bluff and now must save face by actually fighting. The confrontation rarely lasts more than a moment or two, and neither fighter gets harmed—one immediately blinks and the duel is over.

Researchers have also noticed two types of pecking order: what are termed despotic and linear. When a despot is on the scene, all other birds make themselves scarce. A blue jay arriving at the feeder will scatter all the little birds, who stay away until he's gone. In contrast, barnyard hens set up a linear pecking order, in which each one knows her place in line—never challenging those above her, nor challenged by those below. We also see that linear pecking order in our wild birds at the feeder—at least between species. A titmouse will never challenge a wren, for example. Again, the linear pecking order may be occurring within a species, but our inability to tell one chickadee from another keeps us from knowing this.

So I have come to realize that the pecking order established by birds is a way for them to reduce conflict between them, rather than just be a way of picking on each other, as I used to view their interactions. It's another of those situations when we must be careful not to project onto animals the nature or our human social interactions. When I think about it, I can see many kinds of human pecking order that get established—most always based on power. Some examples are within families (so-called hen-pecked husbands), within social groups (the macho guys dominate), and between countries (those with the bigger armies get to peck).

Because the human types of pecking order are more familiar to me, I don't tend to see the inherent injustices that they express, unless I step back, pay attention, and pick up on the power relationships going on. I would guess that birds who might watch humans interact with one another would wonder why some of them so meekly accept the hierarchical structures.