Message from ex WGS Hamm on Mon, 18
Oct 2004 11:10:32 Slightly OT-Feeding Birds:


"Josie" wrote in message
...
I appreciate that the current conventional wisdom suggests that wildlife
is unable to differentiate between safe and dangerous foods; but how
true is it? Is it just hearsay; hypothesis? Birds in my garden don't
touch blue slug pellets, for example. It was once thought that adult
blue tits would suffocate their young by feeding them whole peanuts -
this is now known to be untrue. I remain unconvinced.
If blue tits are fed when they have young in the nest, it isn't so much
that they would be daft enough to shove a whole peanut down the baby's
throat but that they would feed peanuts at all. Baby blue tits need copious
amounts of high protein live food like green and blackfly and other insects.
I think you are getting confused about the reason you must stop feeding wild
birds in spring. It is because they will take the easy option and feed
youngsters innapropriate food.

Presumably there are examples of this happening? I'd be interested in
your sources.

Bead will swell and fill a baby's crop so
that it won't beg for the food it really needs to survive.

Again, I'd be interested in your sources.

The birds may not eat the blue slug pellets, but they will eat the slugs
which have eaten the pellets and still be poisoned.

Sources? None of the birds in my garden appear to be remotely interested
in slugs, unfortunately.

You remain unconvinced because you have not done any research and are not
really interested enough to do any research I'm afraid.

And this statement is based on what? Conjecture? Perhaps like
everything else you've said here? I've read around the subject, hence
my scepticism.

Ignorance kills more animals and birds (wild and captive) than outright
cruelty does, sadly.



--