blonde poker forum

I haven't really seen much of the news over the last few days or read any papers.  I was checking through ceefax earlier catching up on what I had missed. 

There were two stories that caught my eye. One was the sad news that they are culling much of the Grey Squirrel population across various parts of the UK. This is to prevent the red Squirrel numbers decreasing further over the coming years.  I am in two minds about this. Part of me feels it is the only solution, the other part feels saddened by the news.

Ok, the story that caught my eye the most was the finding of a piano up Scotland's highest mountain Ben Nevis. It is thought to have been there for 35 years and was taken to the top by a man who had it strapped to his back as part of a fund raising effort. He played Scotland the Brave once at the summit.

Stories like this are refreshing when most of what gets reported on is war, famine and scandal.  It is good to hear a story that has no negativity connected to it for a change.

Disgracefull, i hope he gets fined for littering

If he played "Scotland the brave" , i hope he gets done for noise pollution ;)

lol

The piano was far too young to be left up there too, They should do him for cruelty to pianos.....

lol  kev

Only a Scot would carry a Piano up a mountain.....

The Grey squirrel cull - very sad.

I don't think Man should interfere with Nature, but I think Man maybe introduced Red Squirrrels to the UK, & caused the problem in the first place, though I may be wrong.

In my days running a Property Maintenance Company, we looked after a large, Country House, in 700 acres of grounds, in Derbyshire. The formal gardems - some 15 acres - were by Capability Brown, & were quite stunning - species of trees from all over the World,  most of them several hundred years old.

The Grey Squirrels, however, destroyed many specimen trees. They knaw a complete "ring" of bark off a branch or bough, & then that branch or bough dies.

The owner of the Property told me to destroy the squirrels, I refused, said we could catch them in traps, & we caught a few, & removed them to open woodland nearby. But you can't interfere with nature, & the squirrel "problem" remained.

Not an easy dilemma. What would YOU do? Trees have rights, too. I guess let Nature take it's course. A cruel & wonderful thing, Nature.

 :goodpost:   


Yea it is hard to know what to do.  The Reds and Greys can't live in harmony unfortunately.   I agree with you about refusing to destroy the squirrels Tikay. You were right.  I worked in Horticulture after leaving school until a few years ago. The Boss always demanded we kill any insects we saw near the plants. As I was left pretty much on my own for ten hours a day, I used to put various types of insects into my wheel barrow and take them outside to the rubbish tip rather than kill them.  In my opinion it is wrong to kill things.  They have as much right to life as we do. 

The Red Squirrels will become extinct if we don't intervene .  One idea I would like to see tried would be to re-locate the Red Squirrels to one of the many uninhabited Islands up North.  I remember the Hedgehog cull they had a few years ago. That was a similar situation. 

We have been trusted as stewards of God's creation, so surely interfering is correct...

Thanks Sark.

You put insects in a wheelbarow? I'm having trouble visualising that!

Yea, caterpillars mainly ( millions of them ) , spiders that nested in the plants ( thousands of them )  and Beatles that crawled amongst the netting.   

I'm not sure that's true. Who says we have been entrusted with the stewardship of God's creation?

But whether that's right or wrong, I really don't think we should interfere with nature. Animals & plant life have been around a lot longer than homo sapiens and survived very nicely without us for millions of years.

And who do you think killed the Piano ?  ;goodvevil;

Rocco.

it got frost bite in C minor...........

Yea he had his keys pulled off.  They still don't know how the keys actually got taken off.   It may have been due to the cold weather up there

Yes, Nature doing it's amazingly clever thing, without interference by Man. There are checks & balances in Nature, & they are there for a reason.

There is no definitive "yes or no" to this, but it's always intrigued me, should we interfere or not. On balance, I think not.

But you never answred the question, "who said Man was entrusted with the Stewardship of God's creation?".

Surely man interfering is nature at work....

And i read it in some book...

Actually that is very profound, if an animal kills an animal it is natures way, so if a man kills an animal is that not the next step of natures way?

Please note, i have no wish to kill anything, its just a thought.

Wow, that's an interesting way of looking at it.

Still not sure I agree, though.

Animals kill each other for practical reasons, to survive, to eat, but it's an instinct thing. Humans do it in a pre-meditated way, because we think we know best - but often, we don't.

Is destroying rainforests for commercial gain "stewardship"? When a rainforest is destroyed, a lot more than trees die - whole habitats die with it.

A whale, clealy in distress, is washed up on a beach. Whole hordes of well-meaning people try & rescue it, there are cranes & boats & flotation devices & cameras & stuff. In 19 cases out of 20, the whale dies anyway, but only after being pushed & shoved & manhandled for days. The poor thing was always gonna die, & it was denied the right to a peaceful & dignified death.

I'n very mixed up about all this. On balance, I think we have messed up bad, & if what we have done to animals in the last 100 years is anything to go by, we should leave Nature alone.

I have I a different view on this to most. I am an animal lover, but I see nothing wrong with hunting, if you eat what you kill. Most hunters are the best conservationists I know.

A lot of Britan's wildlife wouldn't exist today if it wasn't for hunting, habitat would be bulldozed flat if it wasn't for the phesant or the fox. People decry killing animals that have lead a good natural life, and then the eat bacon from pigs that have never seen the daylight, or eggs from chickens that live their entire lives squashed together in a pen so small they can never extend their wing from birth to death.

You will never eradicate the gray squirrel, but the red may soon be just a memory. the cull is for the greater good

Mankind is the only rational species on the planet so it is 'natural'

Taking down a rainforrest is practical for a rational species as they need the wood for something else, so it is nature at work...

In the 1930s, Australia had a major beetle problem.

The beetles were decimating the sugar cane crop in Queensland. The solution to the problem was to introduce the cane toad into the ecosystem. Cane toads love nothing more than to eat beetles all day long.

100 were brought over from Hawaii, in a big box full of toads. They were bred in captivity till they had around 3,000 toads. The motley crew of amphibious slimy beasts were let loose on the local beetle population. Problem solved.

Or was it? The plan went tits up. The cane toad can't jump high enough to eat the beetles that set up shop mostly in the upper stalks of sugar cane. They were a bit useless when it came to doing their job.

That's not to say the cane toads weren't successful. They ate everything else instead. Other insects, birds eggs and poor old (much cuter) native froggies. What's more, the cane toad is poisonous and they killed a heap of would be predators aswell.

So successful that they've bred all over Australia, and are wiping out rare species left right and centre in the 12th most bio-deverse nation on the planet. To make matters worse, they don't smell very nice. The Australian government is currently spending millions of dollars to try to eradicate the toad.


Red squirrels are much cuter than grey squirrels. Grey squirrels threaten red squirrels.

Plan A - Kill a whole bunch of grey squirrels and hope for the best.

Plan B - Let nature take it's course.

I know which one I would choose.

If, in 100 years time, we have to explain to our children why human beings are no longer the masters of the planet. That we are now the servant of the bees and wasps, we shall have to explain that it was all because some bright spark wanted to kill a heap of squirrels so that another bunch of squirrels might flourish.

Biodiversity is a good thing for the human race.

What if we find a cure for super-flu, HIV, or Cancer only to discover that the vital ingredient is produced by a plant that we killed off decades ago. All because we couldn't be bothered to recycle and forest responsibly.

The biggest experts in the field, if truth be told, have no idea what the eradication of one species will have on the ecosystem on the whole. Chain reactions cannot be predicted. If we mess too much, we might be slaves to the bees.

"ITS THE BEES I TELL YA, FAR TOO AMBITIOUS"

(http://www.iag.org.uk/image_new/bigbees.jpg)
We'll wait till the fools eradicate the squirrel.
Then, Pinky, we shall make our move.

Two bees or not two bees, that is the question.

I agree wholeheartedly with this thread

Was it not the other way about with the squirrels tho- we already had Red squirrels in Britain but we introduced their evil arch nemesis DR grey squirrel into our wildlife and they didn't like our reddys that much and so the red population got decimated- so I dont think by removing the greys would do anything other than let the red squirrel flourish again to the top- and the reds would still eat all the neccessary insects to keep the insect population in check

So the greys werent here in the 1st place and surely wouldnt make a difference if they were removed!!!

:goodpost: ;iagree;

Although the grey Squirrel isn't a native species to the UK, it is here now so we should protect it.  I saw a feature on Landward ( yes it's me, I am the person that watches it ) about a Northern Island that had been overgrown by an invasive plant species that was preventing birds nesting. The bird population was falling or was expected to fall in the coming years.  They are now considering introducing rabbits to eat the plants and return a balance to the Island.

We are in a powerful position as humans and we can make important decisions that will have a positive and  negative impact on various species. In my opinion, because the grey population vastly outnumbers the red. We should re-home the remaining reds ( obviously not all of them.  But healthy breeding pairs. ) on some of the many Islands up north. This has been done for other species, why not the red squirrel.  For reasons good or bad, which ever way you look at it, without our intervention the greys are here to stay. We shouldn't stand in their path, but we should offer our help to the reds and repopulate a deserted Island that pocesses the required habitat for the reds.

Of course you may get some of the reds refusing to leave  " I have stayed here all my life, I built this nest with my own two paws. I worked my claws to the bone.  I am not moving "

A quite beautuiful Post by Tank, saying so well what I was trying to convey.

Leave Nature alone is the message.

"we need the wood for something else"......

You are not serious, are you Flushy? It's OK to destroy a rainforest because we need the wood?

I have a controvercial opinion on conservation. IT'S POINTLESS! Billions upon billions of species have come and gone. species of insect become extinct everyday. if you scaled down the existence of life on the planet to 24 hours we've been here less than a second. Human Beings believing that they are the culmination of a master plan of a superior being and the guardians of selected fluffy animals is arrogant and sentimental respectively. I'm not saying our consciousness isn't amazing, and I'm against needless destruction but we can't (and shouldn't) save all the dying species.

Survival of the fittest is misinterpretted. The phrase was coined by the wwritten press at the time. it means Fittest in the sense of 'most appropriate' not strongest. Why are we more concerned by the extinction of the Panda than a species of spider? Obviously with the panda we (by which I mostly mean the Chinese) are partly responsible because a) we're in competition for space/ resources and b) some idiots believe in magical cures using bits of it.

why does the dolphin havce more rights than the Tuna, the horse more rights than the cow, the red squirrel more rights that the grey?

here's another can of worms.
I'm against fox hunting, but not for the foxes well being, Im happy for a farmer to shoot a fox, It's more because of what it represents in ourselves. entertaining ourselves by killing for sport. If we're in competition with the fox for resources it's natural for us to kill them off. only difference between us and other species is we feel guilty for it.

:goodpost: :goodpost:

blimey, thanks

Im not expecting it to be a popular opinion

Wow, what a thread to find on a poker forum!

On the subject of red squirrels, I believe everything in our power should be done to protect them.  The Isle of Wight thankfully has a large healthy population and the local council work hard to keep it that way.  Mans intervention is what puts many of these threatened species at risks in the first place, and as such we should be responsible for protecting as best we can.

Adam, no offence, but what an arrogant view to take!  Humans have the ability to help other species, we do so much damage to the planet that it is our responsibility to preserve whenever possible ( it’s called being Humane?) Yes, it’s impossible to save everything, which does not mean that we shouldn’t try to.  You refer to survival of the fittest actually meaning “most appropriate (funny enough, Hitler had the same view, but that is a whole new topic) who deems what is most appropriate?

We introduce a species to a habitat, or dramatically change animal’s surroundings, sit back and watch the results.  Many times it will have a damaging consequence on the natural habitants, do we leave the mistake and see who lives?  Or should we try to correct what we have done.

We have the ability to conserve, we should.

:goodpost:  ;iagree;

http://www.formby-online.co.uk/community/redsquirrel.htm (http://www.formby-online.co.uk/community/redsquirrel.htm)

A fantastic visit if you can get there!

They will feed out of your hands.

Then when fed up with the squirrels a short walk will take you over some
huge sand dunes and down onto an expanse of clean beautiful beach!

very well said Ginger. I agree with your post 100%

It's a fantastic & fascinating thread, & I'm proud that it's on blonde, & I hope it runs for a goodly while yet.

But it IS an emotive subject, & so please remember to keep it cool!

I confess to a great interest in this subject, alhough I am not at all sure what is right & wrong, & we can never get a definitive answer.

Anyone who has read Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" would be pretty much ashamed at the havoc that Man has wreaked on the animal, bird & plant population during the last century. Earth has existed for x billion years, but in just 100 years, "civilised" Man has destroyed more than one can possibly imagine.

It's a very sad thing. But I really don't now what's right & wrong here, & nor, I suspect, does anyone else.

If Man had left Nature alone in the first place, there would be no need for conservation! What a dilemma.

and if we keep ignoring the cause and effects of global warming all of this will become a moot point!

YEAH!! This is my jungle and your not having it, so clear off - the lot of you!!!  :tikay:

Ginger's Post throws an interesting light on this.

Essentially, she says that we need to conserve because we interfered in the first place. Too right. But where does "interfering" start & finish? Is that not what caused some of the probs in the first place?

That God person has his or her hands full with us lot. I wonder of he/she ever regrets than Man exists, & that the Planet would have been better off without us?

Nature has also wiped out entire species. Nature doesn't work by always getting it right, it works by getting it wrong millions of times.

Man is a product on nature, therefore it could be argued that everything that man does is natural.

If man dodnt exist, and a volcanic eruption wiped out all the life in africa, who would care, so what would it matter?.

Before man arrived, this sort of thing did happen. Perhaps man is just another natural disaster.

As Tony says, It's a very deep question, these are just some of my thoughts, I don't know the answers.

Tikay, we start by stopping!

If we stop thinking that this is our planet alone to do with as we please. We SHARE it, with millions of other creatures, we are NOT Gods and we have no more of a right to be here than anything else.  Who are we to move a species to a new habitat, with no idea of the consequences. They were never there for a reason.

We MUST then try to reverse some of the damage that has already been done, We made the mess, we have to clean it up or generation to come will suffer the consequences.

All this started with a Post about a Piano on a hill!

I agree with paras 1 & 2. I'm not so sure about Para 3 though. I just don't know.

Women are like pianos, when they're not upright, they're grand!

Are you saying that's their forte?

Haha thats fantastic-gonnae steal that patter!!!

This reminded me of the famous Sunday Sport headlines:-

"WWII bomber found on the moon", and:-
"Red London bus found in the arctic", classics.

As for the squirrels, well the red ones are more asthetically pleasing so lets keep 'em.

The whole killing for pleasure thing caught my eye though, cats are famous for this and also killer whales (seals), also lions will kill cheetahs and their cubs on sight to prevent them taking their prey.
Do we prevent this?

My dog kills bumble bees.

My face kills any chance i have of pulling :)

tikay, did your company look after Chatsworth? was that the house and grounds by Capability Brown you were referring to?

No, but not a million miles away. It was Wigwell Grange, near Wirksworth, in Derbyshire.

Exactly.  We are equal with all other creatures.  Thats why I personally don't kill anything, even insects.  The Planet is there for all living things to SHARE. 


Now, where did I put those peace beads.. :D

Whar about the food you eat, the clothes you wear?

What about germs?

What you mean is you don't kill anything you don't need to kill, which is as it should be.

I wear shoes from the vegan shop online.  I do kill germs, you are correct.   What I should have said was, I limit what I kill to an absolute minimum.  Even Becks is a vegetarian beer.  You are correct, my wording wasn't the best.

How does vegetarian beer differ?

Btw Sark, I'm not having a pop, just chewing the fat. (Hmm, maybe I could have used a better metaphor)

i prefer bacon beer myself........

I know Red. No worries  :D

Ehhh,  I am not sure how it is brewed. I am more of a drinker  :D.

  I went to a brewery(sp?) when I was about 20.  To be honest, I wanted to be at the bike race along the road, but to keep the peace with my ex-girlfriends family, I opted for the Beer factory tour.  I had a long talk with one of the guys working there about different types of beers. He said that Becks was a beer that was completely animal friendly.  There was a common Scottish beer that wasn't.  I have read on a few sites that I sometimes visit that most foods and drinks are now going down the animal friendly route and doing away with animal fats/ gelatin, etc.  Vegetable fats and natural herbs, etc are being used in there place.

You misunderstand a couple of key points in my stance.

firstly It's not arrogant. quite the opposite, its super-humble. I don't think we're anymore important or deserving than any other species. I believe looking at ourselves as keepers of the planet for the planets sake is arrogant. It makes sense to protect our environment. we have to live here after all.

Survival of the fittest and most appropriate; NO ONE DECIDES. that's the natural selection part. it's not up to us or a god to decide what species should and shouldn't survive. If we kill off wasps, rats or slugs is that worse than killing off Tigers, Pandas or Grey Squirells? (this has nothing to do with Hitler, stay on the topic ;) )

Finaly, on your last comment. we can't damage the planet. not permanently anyway. we've only been here a blink of an eye and long after we're gone the planet and whatever life there is on it will be just fine. The geological history of this planet is amazing. when the comet hit and the dinasaurs bit the dust it was something like 97% of ALL LIFE that was wiped out, plants, animals and bacteria. the planet survived. the polls have flipped back and forth which would have had cataastrophic effects on life. the atmophere has been poisonous methane based and probably will be again in the future.

When you look at the BIG picture. the squirells don't matter and nor do we. Jeez, now I feel REALLY REALLY SMALL.

one of the most eye opening books I ever read was "The Science Of Discworld" by Terry Pratchet. it was co written with a couple of scientists and alternates between Discworld fiction and the history of the universe and of Earth. I thouroughly recommend it.

that's my point about hunting. we're more developed than other creatures. Hunting for sport makes me see the animal in us and it's ugly. I was watching a documentary on David Attenborough and he showed a clip of Chimps hunting Monkeys in packs. they do eat it but only really at an after-thought. they don't get anymore than a nibble each out of it, it seems like entertainment for them.

Better not let matt see this post mate.

lol ;hide;

yeah, look out Matt, Chimps hunt and kill monkeys for fun, tearing them limb from limb while they are still alive.

Conservation is ok in my book when it comes to breeding threatened species in captivity, or similar methods. When it comes to messing with their natural competitors, no thakyou very much. If theres a way to conserve the red squirrel without messing with the grey squirrel then I'm all for it.

By eliminating, or simply drastically decreasing the numbers of one species we don't like. We may affect the population of another species. Perhaps a useful species, that we like to eat, will decrease in numbers. Or perhaps a species that is a big pest will incease in number.

Every species in the ecosystem depends on every other species. If we start messing with that, by killing off large groups of animals we don't like. We have no idea what will happen.
Not just species of animal and insect, which Sark wil survive without, but species of plant too. They're all interdependant on each other.

I just watched Planet of the Apes (the old ones) where the chimpanzees were quite insistant that "ape does not kill ape"

David Attenborough has just buggered up a lot of the important symbolism in that film.  ;tk;

I think the key point with the squirrels is that by culling the greys you save the reds and neither become extinct (though extinct is not the right word as there must be some elsewhere in the world).
Whereby leaving it as is, you sign the death warrant for the reds.

Think you may have missed the point Tank, that WE introduced grey squirrels to this country, they are not "natural competitors" as they should never been here in the first place.

It's nature at work.

Are you serious?

i think the cull is a necessary evil, but it has nothing to do with any god.i have no more right to oxygen than any rabbit or dragon fly.and the only person/people/god i serve are my family and friends and sometime even strangers

Well, I don't think we would ever agree on that. I know the point you are making, but I would really struggle to accept it, ever.

By trying to stop people destroying the rainforrests you are interfering

Hard to formulate a sensible argument to counter such a mindset as THAT!

So we let everyone do whatever they want to Plant Earth, otherwise we are interfering with Nature?

I hope to god he is joking.

i did post a longer version of the following post but it got lost. in fact, i posted 2 as i forgot about the trees and it also dissapeared. the first reply was better :D


her are my views

squirrel debate
theres nothing wrong with mixed race squirrels as there is nothing wrong with mixed race humans. i really dont think humans have the right to kill the grey at the expense of the red even if we did introduce them. if the squirrels didnt want to breed with each other, they wouldnt and ive never heard of quirrel rape:)
Also, the world would not be the same without the evolutionary processes that have got us here and may or may not keep us here. the evolution of squirrels is happening and they dont seem to bothered.


human keeper of the earth
some humans cant even look after themselves and i dont believe its a 'god' given right for us to assume that power. we should not be messing with nature at all.
mother nature is the true force of this planet and of all existance. she is a thread running through everything we know and dont know. 'god' is a human invention and varies widely from religion to religion. mother nature is a constant we can rely on.


trees
if i was the land owner, id smear the bark of the tree with some organic nasty tasting stuff or build some contraption to save the trees however, this is where i go back to evolution. im sure the landowners trees, or their species would adapt over the centuries and protect themselves against nasty bark eaters. is this not the way nature works? species evolve according to their environments and survival needs. i bet there are lots of extinct species who have not made the mark and there will be plenty to come maybe even including human kind? who knows where a million years will take the planet?

I am sure he is just trying to wind peeps up Jane.

humans should concentrate on not interfering but setting laws about deliberate destruction of the habitat, for example the rain forrest

This is why I just adore Sark's Posts.

Somehow, in the middle of this awesome thread, in deadly earnest, he slips in a mention of a bike race.....

Sark, My Hero.

And there you have it. Contrast Mad's view with Fliushy's. Two sane, intelligent people, with views as far apart as it's possible to get.

Though I'm quite sure Flushy is not being serious.

Firstly the grey squirrel KILL the red ones, they don't breed with them it's genocide.
Secondly i think Flushy is winding you up Tikay.

I am, i am making a point, Tikay says we shouldnt interfer, but up to what point?

How will the cull work?

Will the King offer a shiny ha'penny for every squirrel carcass?

Instead of killing them, can we just take all the grey squirrel's nuts?

we could paint all the red ones grey, then the evil grey ones wouldnt know who to kill :)

I just saw three grey squirrels at my local Forrest while out a run.  They didn't want to be interviewed about this topic sadly and ran up a tree.

The guy that is the game keeper at the forest is a nice old guy.  I asked him about this topic just now. He said what a few other people in this thread have said  " it is survival of the fittest ". The greys apparently are immune to the deadly squirrel pox virus, but the reds aren't. 

Sark your a penguin chasing squirrels in the forest for an interview concerning a debate on Evolution & Conservation.  :D :D Sark I love how your mind works.

I think I've helped with the squirrel thing...

.. One ran under my car today and when I looked in my mirror, it was dead... I was so upset I nearly cried!

You shouldn't have felt guilty Poppet.  It wasn't your fault.  I almost hit a Rabbit once while on a cycling holiday, I avoided it at the last minute and hit a picnic table instead. The old guy wasn't impressed.

I read a few years ago about tunnels being made under various roads for Otters. This is to prevent them getting hit by cars. I thought this was a great idea. There is one of these on a road in Hampshire. It is not only Otters that use it, but other animals such as badgers.  Sadly they can't put these tunnels everywhere because all the roads would collapse into all the underpasses.

Bicycles, rabbits, picnic tables....

PLEASE don't start us off again Sark. We have yet to recover from the savage horse & Thomas The Tank Engine.

squirrel's..they are only Rats with long bushy tails...

Noooo, they're so cute!

Reversed ..that's what i would have done Poppet.. just to be sure it was a Squirrel 8)

I wonder why a rabbit and a picnic table were out at the same time?

Perhaps the rabbit had myxomatosis

Poor little rabbits, lets not even get started on what we've done to them! It probably didn't even hear/see you Sark as so many of them have myximitosis. VERY cruel disease!

Beat me to it Red.

They run into head lights.. don't they. When they have   Mickymetoeshurtz..

 rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao

Squirrels are ranked in the top 10 intelligent animals in the UK. My favorites occupy the top placings. The Rook was number 1. In the top 10 there was also, the rat, dog, raven, crow, pine martin ( I have never seen one of these sadly ), ferret, cats.  I can't remember the others, but badgers were probably in there.  For problem solving squirrels are really switched on.  The researchers set all the animals various tasks and timed them while they worked them out.

  Did you know the octopus is really intelligent?. They have huge brains.

Rabbits withy Myxi-whatsit, what a terrible thing to see.

I saw a baby Rabbit on a Fairway of a golf course one day, I thought it was asleep, or dead. I went up to it, & it was in ghastly shape, myxi big time, blind, & apparently in terrible pain. I wanted to put it out of it's misery, & decided to thwack it with my driver. (Golf club). But I could not bring myself to do it, I just could not. I should have though. Mind you, I'd have missed.

The rabbit population does get top heavy sometimes, but I'm sure Nature has a way of dealing with it. If you ever saw a Rabbit with Myxi, you'd just know, that's not Nature's way.

Flushy is at number 33

PACK IT IN Sark.

A lovely Post, fascinating, then you swerve ball us with that Octopus reference......

I've just sussed it. Sark is Jen's brother.

Intelligent? They don't even know that they should STOP, LOOK, LISTEN, THINK at the road. I swear mine was commiting suicide because he saw me coming so ran out into the road... stupid if you ask me!

This is a sad thing. But it is difficult to know what to do about it.  It would be nice if we could click our fingers, but sadly that is nature.  It takes alot to put something out of its misery. When I was about 13 and walking home from work one day there was a bird that was injured. Like you I couldn't help it.  I flagged down a passing car and asked the guy driving it to help me. At first he thought I was a carjacker. But he did it for me.  Its terrible being a coward  :D

All the members of the crow family are really intelegent, you should see them opening discarded burger boxes at my local Mcdonalds. The Jackdaws are the best, they sit on the roofs of cars at the drive through squawking "Hold the mayo, hold the mayo"

OMG of course squirrels know to stop look and listen ... you youngsters have never heard of Tufty the squirrel ??  he was a legend in the road safety learning in schools when i was younger.

I was also a member of the Tufty Club,

Who?  :D

tut ... kids of today  ;tk;




[attachment deleted by admin]

When we were kids, we had goldfish, & one of them fell ill, got that balance problem, where they seem to go on their side.

We were told it was contagious, we had to remove him fom the pond (well, tin bath) & put it to sleep, so Dad told me to sort it. I put him on the floor, & got  a paving slab ready to drop on him. But I just could not do it.

Eventually, I flushed him down the toilet, a far more cruel way for him to die, as it happens.

Some wild cats took to living in our garden, my Dad fed them, within months we had 30 or 40. He could not bring himself to "control" them. One day the next door neighbour killed the lot of them by catching them, putting them in a sack, & dumping them in the canal. What an arse.

Wasn't tufty on The Word??

lol no .. that was mufti ... IT scared me !!

lol

Tufty

[attachment deleted by admin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/369327.stm

I agree... F*&^ing Tw?t

lol Red

Yea you are right. For the last few summers, there have been  injured rooks coming to my Garden. I always feed them because they are unable to fly properly.  One thing I have noticed about these particular rooks is the same behaviour patterns and appearance.  Rather than being average rook size they are slightly bigger and they have failing eyesight. It is sad to see, but there is very little you can do to help them. I built a shelter at the bottom of the garden and give them food. To go with their failing eyesight, after a few weeks of being mainly grounded their senses become less sensitive to the point where they don't really notice people walking up. I am not an expert, but I have noticed that all these birds have a skin condition that caused the feathers to become lose.  I contacted a bird sanctuary, but they said they get thousands of calls a week and couldn't help me out. I understood their position and just made sure the birds had as easy a life as I could make for them.  They were both called Joe. I had Joe 1 in 2004. Joe 2 in 2005. Hopefully there will be no Joe 3 in 2006. I think they say to each other  " go down the road to that house....there is a mug there that feeds us "  :D

At the moment I have a starling that can't fly staying in my garden, he doesn't need feeding at this time of year, but I do have to fend the local cats off.

I hope he gets better before winter, Africa is a bloody long walk.

Yea he has a few months yet before it gets cold 

Joe seems, to me, a silly name for a Rook. Why Joe?

Ronnie would be better, surely?

I watched Meet Joe Black  the night before.   The rook was black and got the name Joe.

I had a crow called Grottle, it's a long story.

Tell.

Now.

Please!

Is it a good idea to be handling ill birds given the current virus crossing the globe...?

No time now, off to my grandaughter Alisha's birthday party (She's 4)

have a good day gramps!!!

For the avoidance of doubt, especially to Kev, he's referring to Red-Dog. OK?

Yeah, cos if he was talking about you he would have said .."Great Gramps"

I don't handle them , but I do feed them much to the annoyance of my neighbours who hate birds.

Apparently the most humane way to kill a goldfish is to place it in a bowl of water and put it in the freezer (think I read it on here somewhere).

Not sure I could do it though.

Why would you want to kill a goldfish?

self defence!!!

My son had a couple of golfish and it had a fungus growth on its nose. You can buy drops to put in the water but sadly they still died.

Its horrible watching them lay on there sides slowly dying but I could not bring myself to put them out of their misery.

I see

Woooooooohooooooooooooo..........I'm a HERO MEMBER   ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader;

Do fish have noses...and if so..what are they sniffing for..?

It is a well known fact that goldfish are far better at finding truffles than pigs are

OK .. Dewi..I really have led a sheltered life..

PMSL :D :D :D :D :D :D

Never saw that reply..... rotflmfao rotflmfao

I was ragin with my mate at new year-he put my wee bro's goldfish in his mouth thinkin it was funny- then when he spat it back in the bowl it just flapped around and lay on its side- I chucked my mate out the house and ended up racing around on the 2nd of january looking for a goldfish so my bro wouldnt notice

this is a fascinating thread


I do vote that Sark gets his own blonde blog though.....visits to the home page would rocket.

Fantastic film!

Sark can have a blog any day he wants.

He said, & I quote, "you are too young tikay".

He's my Hero.

Rarely heard Kev say I was too young.

Sorry to go back to the origional point of the thread but i solved the mystery of how a piano could of lost its keys in such a difficult location to get to.

its obvious really!!!

































































13 year old HOODIES vandalised it.