"Simon Mc" wrote in message
...
Hi,

We have a couple of guinea pigs who live outdoors on the lawn in a movable
hutch/run during the summer months.

Can anyone tell me of any lawn fertilisers and feeds that are available
that
will DEFINATELY NOT harm the guinea pigs. Most fertilisers say they're
safe
after a period of time for kids and pets, but I assume that means larger
pets like cats and dogs.

If there are any rabbit owners who have a solution then please pipe up too
as what's ok for the rabbit is probably ok for the guinea pigs.

if you are going to apply any fertiliser I sugges something organic.
Synthetics may be ok but I can't vouch for what is in them. Pelletised poop
should be ok. Try fertilising one 1/2 of the lawn at a time. Fertilise on
1/2, graze the pigs on theother 1/2 for 2-3 weeks and then swap them round.

rob

Hi,

We have a couple of guinea pigs who live outdoors on the lawn in a movable
hutch/run during the summer months.

Can anyone tell me of any lawn fertilisers and feeds that are available that
will DEFINATELY NOT harm the guinea pigs. Most fertilisers say they're safe
after a period of time for kids and pets, but I assume that means larger
pets like cats and dogs.

If there are any rabbit owners who have a solution then please pipe up too
as what's ok for the rabbit is probably ok for the guinea pigs.

--
Regards,

Simon Mc
(remove GLOVES to reply)

Of course, I mean to title this "Best way to treat a lawn that is shared
with guinea pigs"
"Simon Mc" wrote in message
...
Hi,

We have a couple of guinea pigs who live outdoors on the lawn in a movable
hutch/run during the summer months.

Can anyone tell me of any lawn fertilisers and feeds that are available
that will DEFINATELY NOT harm the guinea pigs. Most fertilisers say
they're safe after a period of time for kids and pets, but I assume that
means larger pets like cats and dogs.

If there are any rabbit owners who have a solution then please pipe up too
as what's ok for the rabbit is probably ok for the guinea pigs.

--
Regards,

Simon Mc
(remove GLOVES to reply)

said...
Hi,

We have a couple of guinea pigs who live outdoors on the lawn in a movable
hutch/run during the summer months.

Can anyone tell me of any lawn fertilisers and feeds that are available that
will DEFINATELY NOT harm the guinea pigs. Most fertilisers say they're safe
after a period of time for kids and pets, but I assume that means larger
pets like cats and dogs.

If there are any rabbit owners who have a solution then please pipe up too
as what's ok for the rabbit is probably ok for the guinea pigs.


You've got guinea pigs running around on the lawn - and you need
fertiliser???
--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

said...
The message
from "Simon Mc" contains these words:

Of course, I mean to title this "Best way to treat a lawn that is shared
with guinea pigs"
"Simon Mc" wrote in message
...
Hi,

We have a couple of guinea pigs who live outdoors on the lawn in a
movable
hutch/run during the summer months.

Can anyone tell me of any lawn fertilisers and feeds that are available
that will DEFINATELY NOT harm the guinea pigs.

Surely guinea pigs apply their own fertiliser?

Mine certainly did.

Lawns do perfectly well (IMHO) if you don't apply anything at all,
ever. We never have.

The only thing I ever apply to my lawn (except it's grass rather than a
'lawn') is a rabbit.

--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

said...
Surely guinea pigs apply their own fertiliser?
Sena writes
Mine certainly did.


And not only that - guinea pigs love ground elder!!!


--
Klara, Gatwick basin

said...

said...
Surely guinea pigs apply their own fertiliser?
Sena writes
Mine certainly did.


And not only that - guinea pigs love ground elder!!!

For reasons I am unable to fathom, one of my rabbits loved rhubarb
leaves and privet. But then he was also a devil for marmalade
sandwiches and bananas, as are the current crop of bunnies. You don't
happen to know of anything other than those little black catterpillars
that eats that tall yellow stuff horses mustn't have, do you?
--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

Sena wrote:
You don't happen to know of anything other than those little black
catterpillars that eats that tall yellow stuff horses mustn't have, do you?

Ragwort... and no.

That'll be Cinnabar moth caterpillars... the moth itself is day-flying and
very pretty.... bright cerise and black.

http://www.arkive.org/species/ARK/in...d_freshwater/T
yria_jacobaeae/ARK013988.html?size=medium

The caterpillars are yellow & black striped, like Tigger.
--
Sue
Pendragon Hamstery
Portsmouth, Hampshire UK
--http://www.pendragonhams.com--

said...
Sena wrote:
You don't happen to know of anything other than those little black
catterpillars that eats that tall yellow stuff horses mustn't have, do you?

Ragwort... and no.

That's the one! I knew it, but the name just wouldn't come to me.

That'll be Cinnabar moth caterpillars... the moth itself is day-flying and
very pretty.... bright cerise and black.

They're gorgeous, aren't they. They don't seem to actually eat the
plant - or if they do they're not very thorough. My main concern is
that the (almost) feral rabbit will develop a taste for the stuff. I
assume that so far he hasn't, as he's still very much with us...

http://www.arkive.org/species/ARK/in...d_freshwater/T
yria_jacobaeae/ARK013988.html?size=medium

The caterpillars are yellow & black striped, like Tigger.

Tigger was a caterpillar??

--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

Sena wrote:
Ragwort... and no.

That's the one! I knew it, but the name just wouldn't come to me.

That'll be Cinnabar moth caterpillars... the moth itself is day-flying and
very pretty.... bright cerise and black.

They're gorgeous, aren't they. They don't seem to actually eat the
plant - or if they do they're not very thorough. My main concern is
that the (almost) feral rabbit will develop a taste for the stuff. I
assume that so far he hasn't, as he's still very much with us...

Ah... you might want to watch out for that. From what I know, it's a
cumulative poison stored in the liver, so even though your bunny is still ok
now, one day out of the blue he might not be
--
Sue
Pendragon Hamstery
Portsmouth, Hampshire UK
--http://www.pendragonhams.com--

EastneyEnder wrote:

Sena wrote:
Ragwort... and no.

That's the one! I knew it, but the name just wouldn't come to me.

That'll be Cinnabar moth caterpillars... the moth itself is day-flying
and very pretty.... bright cerise and black.

They're gorgeous, aren't they. They don't seem to actually eat the
plant - or if they do they're not very thorough. My main concern is
that the (almost) feral rabbit will develop a taste for the stuff. I
assume that so far he hasn't, as he's still very much with us...

Ah... you might want to watch out for that. From what I know, it's a
cumulative poison stored in the liver, so even though your bunny is still
ok now, one day out of the blue he might not be

Here we go again. I have posted several times about this but it needs doing
again I see,

No actually it isn't s poison that is stored in the liver. The damage is
cumulative but the poison disappears. There is actually very very little
risk from ragwort at all. It can cause poisoning in very very rare cases
but that is usually caused by it being present in hay.

There are a whole series of thresholds before any damage is done at all so,
contrary to what you may have read, small doses have no effect at all.

I know that there is a lot of stuff around telling you that Ragwort is
dangerous but it all comes from a few dodgy sources who have been
publicising it for their own interests. It is almost a classic example of
how to deceive people with bad science. Since I got interested in this I
have spent a lot of time checking scientific papers to get at the truth.

Some of the bad science has even got repeated in government press releases!

For more details on the science see http://www.ragwortfacts.com/

There is little risk to animals like rabbits and Guinea pigs for unless it
is dried it tastes and smells so awful to them that they won't touch it.

In fact one of the signs that a place is being overgrazed, by rabbits or
anything else, is that ragwort its growing there in abundance.

The moth is gorgeous and the website debunks a myth about that too, but it
isn't the only thing that depends on this plant.


Neil Jones
http://www.butterflyguy,com/

said...
Sena wrote:
Ragwort... and no.

That's the one! I knew it, but the name just wouldn't come to me.

That'll be Cinnabar moth caterpillars... the moth itself is day-flying and
very pretty.... bright cerise and black.

They're gorgeous, aren't they. They don't seem to actually eat the
plant - or if they do they're not very thorough. My main concern is
that the (almost) feral rabbit will develop a taste for the stuff. I
assume that so far he hasn't, as he's still very much with us...

Ah... you might want to watch out for that. From what I know, it's a
cumulative poison stored in the liver, so even though your bunny is still ok
now, one day out of the blue he might not be

He's certainly fine at the moment. Four babies in a hutch show that not
only does he know what do with a doe (we didn't realise it was a doe but
that't irrelevant) but that he can also release her from her hutch in
order to do so.
http://frances.fotopic.net/c951846.html
(I got a bit carried away with the photos...)

--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

Neil Jones wrote:
[...]
Here we go again. I have posted several times about this but it needs doing
again I see,

No actually it isn't s poison that is stored in the liver. The damage is
cumulative but the poison disappears. There is actually very very little
risk from ragwort at all. It can cause poisoning in very very rare cases
but that is usually caused by it being present in hay.

There are a whole series of thresholds before any damage is done at all so,
contrary to what you may have read, small doses have no effect at all.

I know that there is a lot of stuff around telling you that Ragwort is
dangerous but it all comes from a few dodgy sources who have been
publicising it for their own interests. It is almost a classic example of
how to deceive people with bad science. Since I got interested in this I
have spent a lot of time checking scientific papers to get at the truth.

Some of the bad science has even got repeated in government press releases!

For more details on the science see http://www.ragwortfacts.com/

There is little risk to animals like rabbits and Guinea pigs for unless it
is dried it tastes and smells so awful to them that they won't touch it.

In fact one of the signs that a place is being overgrazed, by rabbits or
anything else, is that ragwort its growing there in abundance.

The moth is gorgeous and the website debunks a myth about that too, but it
isn't the only thing that depends on this plant.


As a sometimes enthusiastic revisionist about many things, I agree it's
an interesting site; but it doesn't seem to quote very many papers, and
it certainly doesn't deny the toxicity of these plants. You don't want
them in hay or silage. I wasn't at all cheered by reading that some
unnamed scientific hooligans only managed to kill 75% of a sample of
cattle by feeding them 0.6% of their body weight of fresh ragwort a day
for 20 days: in the dried form, that would be quite a small amount --
perhaps something like the volume of a packet or two of tea -- and
might well escape the stockman's detection. The way the result was
quoted represented the dose as very large, and appeared to be an
attempt at reassurance.

I was struck by the quoted findings of a US study on the seed dispersal
of one species (it didn't say, but I assume it was only a single
species). It seemed the results of the study were being called in
evidence to suggest that there was no need to worry much about ragwort
populations on waste ground catastrophically "infecting" cultivated
areas: my intuitive sense is that that's right, as long as neighbouring
areas are well managed.

Of course people shouldn't panic about the ragworts; but they _are_
toxic, and they aren't endangered, so getting them out is generally a
good idea, especially in fodder crops. Even if one has no susceptible
stock, I think it's reasonable to be a good neighbour to others,
especially if any of one's neighbours are practising organic husbandry
-- they should be helped, not given extra work.

--
Mike.

said...
I wasn't at all cheered by reading that some
unnamed scientific hooligans only managed to kill 75% of a sample of
cattle by feeding them 0.6% of their body weight of fresh ragwort a day
for 20 days: in the dried form, that would be quite a small amount --
perhaps something like the volume of a packet or two of tea -- and
might well escape the stockman's detection. The way the result was
quoted represented the dose as very large, and appeared to be an
attempt at reassurance.


It certainly didn't reassure me. I wondered, as I read that bit and the
bit about the horses, just who had provided the money for such wanton
slaughter. Or do we (generic) then feed ragwort-ridden cattle to animals
in the form of 'my little cat food'?
--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

Mike Lyle wrote:


Neil Jones wrote:
[...]
Here we go again. I have posted several times about this but it needs
doing again I see,

No actually it isn't s poison that is stored in the liver. The damage is
cumulative but the poison disappears. There is actually very very little
risk from ragwort at all. It can cause poisoning in very very rare cases
but that is usually caused by it being present in hay.

There are a whole series of thresholds before any damage is done at all
so, contrary to what you may have read, small doses have no effect at
all.

I know that there is a lot of stuff around telling you that Ragwort is
dangerous but it all comes from a few dodgy sources who have been
publicising it for their own interests. It is almost a classic example of
how to deceive people with bad science. Since I got interested in this I
have spent a lot of time checking scientific papers to get at the truth.

Some of the bad science has even got repeated in government press
releases!

For more details on the science see http://www.ragwortfacts.com/

There is little risk to animals like rabbits and Guinea pigs for unless
it is dried it tastes and smells so awful to them that they won't touch
it.

In fact one of the signs that a place is being overgrazed, by rabbits or
anything else, is that ragwort its growing there in abundance.

The moth is gorgeous and the website debunks a myth about that too, but
it
isn't the only thing that depends on this plant.


As a sometimes enthusiastic revisionist about many things, I agree it's
an interesting site; but it doesn't seem to quote very many papers, and
it certainly doesn't deny the toxicity of these plants.


There is an abvious logical flaw in what you are saying. Just because a
website says something that a lot of other websites do not say does not
mean it is wrong. It is the scientific facts that count. There actually
isn't a lot of study that has been done so the fact that ony a few papers
are quoted does nothing to undermine credibility,

RAgwort poisoning is actually very rare, but certain people have made a big
fuss and misused statistics in a very very unethical way to mislead people.
We know it is very rare because internationally there are a set of
scientific papers that say this.
You find for example that someone has written a scientific paper in Holland
because of a poisoning incident, caused incidentally by gross stupidity,
and that it is interesting because a case hasn't been reported in years.
The French looked into it and couldn't find a case!





You don't want
them in hay or silage.

That is the only place they cause problems and then only if there is
sufficient.

I wasn't at all cheered by reading that some
unnamed scientific hooligans only managed to kill 75% of a sample of
cattle by feeding them 0.6% of their body weight of fresh ragwort a day
for 20 days: in the dried form, that would be quite a small amount --
perhaps something like the volume of a packet or two of tea -- and
might well escape the stockman's detection. The way the result was
quoted represented the dose as very large, and appeared to be an
attempt at reassurance.


You have to compare it with the hysteria. You have government press releases
repeating nonsense from the Equine press that the seeds are dangerous
because they might be inhaled. At the level of toxicity this is daft, yet
we have the highways agency talking about it as if it is a "Weapon of mass
Destruction". THey are wasting money clearing it from places where it does
not pose any risk what so ever.


Small doses will cause ZERO damage because of a whole series of biochemical
thresholds which have to be exceeded before any damage is done to the animal
at all. The compounds in Ragwort are actually non-toxic and have to be
converted before they can cause damage. The class of compounds produced
that then go on to cause problems are found in small amounts in a whole
range of foodstuffs including bread and coffee. We don't get poisoned
because the dose is below a damage threshold.

There are a lot of places where these chemicals occur in larger amounts,
both in common plants which aren't ragwort, ( I shan't name them because I
don;t want to start another bout of hysteria) and in places like bonfires,
incinerators and vehicle exhausts.




I was struck by the quoted findings of a US study on the seed dispersal
of one species (it didn't say, but I assume it was only a single
species). It seemed the results of the study were being called in
evidence to suggest that there was no need to worry much about ragwort
populations on waste ground catastrophically "infecting" cultivated
areas: my intuitive sense is that that's right, as long as neighbouring
areas are well managed.

It is Senecio jacobeae the common ragwort that all the fuss is about.
I recall seeing another paper with similar conclusions. It is so obvious
anyway that most seeds will not fly long distances.



Of course people shouldn't panic about the ragworts; but they _are_
toxic, and they aren't endangered, so getting them out is generally a
good idea, especially in fodder crops. Even if one has no susceptible
stock, I think it's reasonable to be a good neighbour to others,
especially if any of one's neighbours are practising organic husbandry
-- they should be helped, not given extra work.

Actually the whole fuss is already wasting a lot of public money and
threatening to cause an awful lot of work for people.

Based on the ragwort hysteria a Scottish MSP who has been repeating a lot of
silly things without checking them tried to introduce an amendment to a law
making it a crime to have a toxic plant of any kind anywhere where an
animal might eat it. Fortunately somone with some knowledge of ecology
spotted it and rather late in the day too.

As an entomologist I know there is a basic rule. ALL plants contain toxins
of one kind or another. Brassica poisonging and Onion poisoning are both
well known in livestock. Brassicas contain allyl isothiocynate and the
lethal dose of that in cattle is around 0.001% of body weight.

The environmental effects of such a law could be disastrous. People
removing bluebells and foxgloves because they believe it is demanded by
law. Imagine having to destroy all those woods full of wild garlic. Oak
trees are mildly poisonous too! We already have people believing that you
have to control ragwort by law which is not the case.


Neil Jones
http://www.butterflyguy.com/