# *****rspca Fails Again********



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

SAT HERE CRYING.HAVE KNOWN ABOUT A WOODPIGEON KEPT IN A CAGE FOR OVER 3 MONTHS.CAGE IS FOR BUDGIES.WINGS ARE FRAYED WHERE IT IS TRYING TO FLAP THEM AND THAY HIT THE BARS.RSPCA OFFICER SAYS "THE PEOPLE ARE DOING A GOOD JOB REHABBING BIRDS AND THEY ARE GOING TO RELEASE IT"HUSBAND OF THIS WOMAN SAYS SHE WANTS TO KEEP IT AS A PET TO ME.sAW THE BIRD YESTERDAY WENT INTO THE GARDEN WHEN THEY WENT OUT IT WAS GOING MAD I'LL TRY TO GET THE PHOTOS DEVELOPED.wISH I HAD BROKEN IN.THE OFFICER JUST SAID SHE SAW NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BIRD SO WHY DIDN'T SHE MAKE THEM LET IT OUT.AS ITS MEANT TO BE ILLEGAL TO CAGE A HEALTHE WILD BIRD.I'VE KNOWN ABOUT THIS BIRD FOR 3 MONTHS AS THE PEOPLE ASKED ME TO PUT IT IN MY AVIARY THEN KEPT CHANGING THEIR MIND.CONFRONTED THE HUSBAND LAST NIGHT AND HE SAID HE WOULD RATHER DO AWAY WITH IT THAN LET ME HAVE IT AND HE WAS GOING TO MAKE A CAGE IN THE GARAGE FOR IT.OBVVIOUSLY PULLED THE WOOL OVER INSPECTORS EYES THIS MORNIONG.SURELY IF A RSPCA INSPECTOR SEE A BIRD IN A CAGE WITH TORN WINGS AND A WILD BIRD AT THAT THAY SHOULD TAKE IT THERES ENOUGH REHABBERS WITH AVIARIES.HELP WHAT CAN I DO APART ITS MAKING ME ILL THINKING OF THIS POOR BIRD


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

SPOKE TO THEIR NEIGHBOUR YESTERDAY AND HE SAID HE USED TO WORK FOR THE RSPCA AND HE WAS WORRIED COS THE BIRD HAD BEEN IN THERE FOR SO LONG BUT HE DIDN'T WANT TO REPORT THEM COS THEY WERE NEIGHBOURS I JUST SAID TO THE INSPECTOR THAT HE COULD TELL HER IT HAD BEEN CAGED FOR THAT LONG BUT SHE SAID THAT SHE DIDN'T NEED TO SPEAK TO ANYONE AND THAT I SHOULDN'T BE HARRASSING THESE PEOPLE AND THAT I HAD NO RIGHT TO GO INTO THEIR GARDEN AND NEITHER DID SHE.i WAS A RIGHT PRAT COS LAST NIGHT WHEN I CONFRONTED THE HUSBAND I TOLD THEM I WAS REPORTING HIM SO THEY OBVIOUSLY HAD THEIR STORY READY.HOW CAN AN INSPECTOR JUST WALK AWAY AND LEAVE THAT POOR BIRD.SHE ADMITTED THAT IT LOOKED HEALTHY AND I SAID SO AS IT WAS ILLEGAL TO CAGE A WILD BIRD THAT WAS HEALTHY WHY HADN'T SHE REMOVED IT OR GOT THAM TO LET IT GO.SHE JUST SAID SHE HAD NO RIGHT TO MAKE THESE PEOPLE DO ANYTHING SO WHO IS PROTECTYING WILDLIFE IN PLYMOUTH


----------



## kittypaws (Sep 18, 2005)

Hi Solly,

Sorry to hear you are having problems with the RSPCA  - the cage sounds wholly inadequate for the bird and it would probably be better off being set free than staying with these people. 

Perhaps they think they are doing right by the bird ( although the husband doesn't sound so)

If it were me, I would go back to the RSPCA ( are you ringing the national Helpline or going to a local branch) and tell them that the husband has now threatened to "despatch" the bird rather than set it free or pass it over to you.

It is illegal to keep a wild bird in captivity - especially a healthy one - I think you have to prove that you are a licensed rehabber ( may be slightly wrong here but I am sure people will put me right) to keep a woodpigeon contained.

Must be a stupid RSPCA officer if they think the bird is "in good hands" in such a small cage - do you know what was originally wrong with it.

But I think in the first instance - go back to the RSPCA - tell them you are not happy - keep on at them - I have found with the RSPCA that sometimes you get different perspectives from different operators and officer - ask if you can speak tothe Regional Superintendent.

And if these people are breaking the law - you could try the Wildlife Crime Unit at Scotland Yard - why not - you have nothing to lose. They can be contacted on [email protected] - I contacted them once about a feral pigeon and they did come back to me.

Good luck

Tania xx


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

ithey first told me about this bird the second saturday in november and then the woman just said she didn't want to let it go cos she was attached to it.When they didn't contact me i went to the market she does on the second saturday in decenber and the husband said "i wish shed let you have it we get them,make them better and then let them go but this poor thing came in with broken tail feathers and now its got a lovely set of tail feathers but its wings are broken where he keeps bashing thaem against the cage,don't know why but she just wonyt let it go"This bird was not a baby when thay got it so its known freedom and now has been in a tiny cage for a quarter of a year.i really wish i had broken ijn this makes me sick


----------



## maryjane (Jul 15, 2006)

I wish you luck with this poor bird and am sorry you have to deal with it.


----------



## Feefo (Feb 8, 2002)

This is so sad, wood pigeons are really stressed in small cages, they will even bash against the wire of a small aviary.

But the RSPCA won't be bothered about the threat to dispose of the bird that these people claim to be so attached to. St Tiggywinkles state that ALL unreleasable wood pigeons should be destroyed because they suffer so much stress in captivity.

You have proved them wrong on this.

I would suggest that you try to get him kidnapped while you are prominently elsewhere, but they would probably take revenge so it is not worth risking.

This is sadly a problem that animal lovers face too often, you tried to do the right thing but sometimes it is best to take action without them knowing that you are concerned so they can't trace it back to you.

If you have wildlife police in your area you could contact them, maybe they would take the pigeon to a rehabber like Alison in Totnes.

Cynthia


----------



## roy-me-boy (Dec 28, 2006)

​Hi there,if i were you i would ring the police and and ask for you wildlife liason officer,all English police forces have one.He will investigate.


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

Hello Solly,

You might want to take a look at this PT thread, which was discussing a bird other than a feral pigeon or wood pigeon, which, since they are classed as poultry, unfortunately do not have the legal protection other animals do. 

At least you will know a bit more of what you are up against.

The Lancaster Humane League sickins me! 

(http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/showthread.php?t=14402) 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/vertebrates/gen-licence.htm 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/regulat/forms/cons_man/wlf18.pdf

http://www.naturenet.net/law/birds.html

Larry


----------



## Feefo (Feb 8, 2002)

Thanks Larry, those are interesting links.

I was absolutely horrified at the forbidden activities, I never imagined that human beings would stoop so low in the first place. Every day I am further horrified at the cruelty that some of our species inflict on the defenceless.

I note that they mention placing a magpie in a larsen trap. Someone told me that his father is a gamekeeper and that to ensure that a magpie dies it is put in a cage with food and water. That kills them.


Cynthia


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

*More comments*

Solly and others, 

I have a bit more time now to add urther comments:

Over the past couple of years I have been gathering info as I find it pertaining to animal rights and animal abuse. I do not have this info organized yet the way I would like, due to being tired a lot, new computer, et cetera.

It more or less started out when someone in Seattle (?) complained about the owner of a local store planning to shoot pigeons. They mentioned that the store chain was British-owned. Knowing (or assuming) the British to be stricter about animal treatment, I thought perhaps if we couldn't put approprite pressure on the store manager, drawing the attention of the British owners to his activities might work, if nothing else by pointing out to them that perhaps letting a few harmless pigeons survive might be better than bad public relations for an international company. In a bureaucracy, who wants to be the one who says "I permitted the animals to be killed"? It's more a matter then of Save Your *ss. 

So, I Googled British animal rights, came up with *defra*, found out that pigeons are classified as poultry, and since poultry are meant to be raised economically to be eaten, they are not much protected.

In Britain game birds and wild birds are protected. The laws would have helped in an instance in the PT thread where a pheasant was being kept for a long time in a small cage by another "re-habber." The actions of this so-called rehabber were also overlooked and ignored by inspecting authorities. _(Correction added later: this occurred in the USA)_.

One example of problems encountered in dealing with poultry: I know that one element of Chinese cooking calls for all animals to be freshly killed, immediately before preparation or cooking for consumption, and for all ingredients to be as fresh as possible. Chinese cooking is more about the style and techniques of cooking (such as contrasting colors, textures, sweet and sour, rapid or slow cooking, and so on, than about what ingredients are used. So, a chinese restaurant will have live and probably caged animals on the premises. They will probably be kept in small, stacked, enclosures. They want the animals to be healthy physically, but the psychological or mental health is not of paramount importance to them. 

All such businesses will resist any attempts to have better conditions imposed by regulatory bodies, since there will always be an instance where a complaint can be lodged, fines imposed, and business activties stultified. 

The only hope for a pigeon is to invoke the humanity and sympathy of the keeper. What if you were to offer a larger cage as a show of good faith? No one likes to be criticized (_criticised_ for you British?). Criticism usually instigates a response of anger, and if the one criticized is unable to do anything else, stubbornness. (That's how I often function, anyways. My wife, like most spouses, has her work-arounds when dealing wih me and my pride). 

Sometimes a bit of shaming can work also, but honey attracts flies better than vinegar, as the saying goes. 

Larry


----------



## Whitefeather (Sep 2, 2002)

Thank you Solly, for all that you are doing.  
I hope there is a positive outcome to this sad story. 

Cindy


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

hopefully i will be adding photos later.i've just been looking on the net to define what a woodpigeon is and in all the items i've found it is defined as a game bird not poultry.I don't mean to offend anyone but these were mainly cookery articles.Sorry but if this helps to get this bird released then i'll read anything!


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

*British laws re birds*

Hello Solly, and others,

I guess I better add a caveat:

I also read some time ago that Britain wanted to update laws so as to be in agreement with European Community regulations. 

Any quotes or references (web-links) I have given may be out of date. 

Definitions of game, wildlife, poultry, etc., may have changed. 

Regulations and laws pertainiing to animals may have changed. 

Legal definitions, hunters' definitions, cookbook definitions, and our own ideas of the same may be at odds with one another, within any particular country and between any two countries or regions. 

For example, I read of some who want to pressure the Spanish into criminalizing the use of glue on trees and other surfaces to trap thrushes during their migration through Spain. 

Larry


----------



## Feefo (Feb 8, 2002)

Solly, why don't you just ask DEFRA if they are classified as wild birds, game or poultry?

*Defra Helpline
For information on any aspect of Defra's work, please contact the Defra Helpline by telephone on 08459 33 55 77 or by email at [email protected]*


The RSPB states that even game birds are protected out of season by the Game Acts.

http://www.rspb.org.uk/policy/wildbirdslaw/birdsandlaw/wca/index.asp

When the it became a legal requirement for poultry owners with more than 50 birds to be registered these were the guidelines issued:


> The bird species which must be registered include
> the following:
> • chickens (including bantams)• pheasants • turkeys • *pigeons (reared
> for meat*)• ducks • ostriches• geese • emus• guinea fowl • rheas• quail • cassowaries• partridges
> ...


Cynthia


----------



## roy-me-boy (Dec 28, 2006)

In my experience in England,a Wood pigeon is classed as a wild bird.A couple of years ago a lady rang me and told me her neighbour was shooting at birds with a pellet rifle.I went to see her and stood in her back garden,and within 5 minutes pellets were shooting past our heads at anything that flew,the piece of scum that was doing it didn`t know we were there.The lady told me this had been going on for months and she had found numerouse birds dead,Blackbirds,House Sparrows,Collared Doves.The previouse day she had watched a Wood pigeon shot at off her fence.it died.Luckily she still had it.I rang the Police who put me in touch with there Police liason officer.He came to see us and i gave him the Wood Pigeon(which i had kept refrigerated) as evidence.To cut a long story short,the scum bag shooter was taken to Crown court for Shooting at a Wood Pigeon,he admitted it and was fined £60.00 and had his Rifle confiscated.While in court all the other birds and damage he had caused(broken windows) was not brought up,just the killing of the Wood pigeon!


----------



## mr squeaks (Apr 14, 2005)

roy-me-boy said:


> In my experience in England,a Wood pigeon is classed as a wild bird.A couple of years ago a lady rang me and told me her neighbour was shooting at birds with a pellet rifle.I went to see her and stood in her back garden,and within 5 minutes pellets were shooting past our heads at anything that flew,the piece of scum that was doing it didn`t know we were there.The lady told me this had been going on for months and she had found numerouse birds dead,Blackbirds,House Sparrows,Collared Doves.The previouse day she had watched a Wood pigeon shot at off her fence.it died.Luckily she still had it.I rang the Police who put me in touch with there Police liason officer.He came to see us and i gave him the Wood Pigeon(which i had kept refrigerated) as evidence.To cut a long story short,the scum bag shooter was taken to Crown court for Shooting at a Wood Pigeon,he admitted it and was fined £60.00 and had his Rifle confiscated.While in court all the other birds and damage he had caused(broken windows) was not brought up,just the killing of the Wood pigeon!


Thanks for posting this info roy-me-boy. At least SOMETHING was DONE!!

Where there's a WILL, there can be a WAY and HOPE!


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

Just had another rspca officer on the phone.He says first inspector will be going back tomorrow.This man seemed easier to talk to.I think i got across the point that this bird cannot just be released as it has spent so long in a cage and his wing feathers are damaged,and that he probably should spend some time in an aviary first(just my opinion-not saying i know it all)to make sure he can fly.I said about game birds etc.should not be kept in a cage where ithey cannot stretch their wings in all directions.he said this applied to all birds (unless injured or for rehab purposes)so i said then why couldn't they have taken this one but apparantly they cannot do this even though it is a wild bird.So once again birds needs come second.I'm praying that something is done i layed awake most of the night thinking but i know i cannot do anything myself as these people have all my contact details address and phone number.I'm not saying this woman is all bad she does help birds it is just her lack of knowledge and facilities,she feeds porridge oats doesn't know igeons eat peanuts,need water to bathe in or need worming or get lice.The rspca officer on saturday said that she has a bird with a broken beak that cannot be released so wheres she going to keep that one.I know the baby peacock she had last year when i first met her died and she said she thought she had given it too much water. Anyway i was going to post some photos they are not on digital so i have scanned tham onto computer but haven't a clue wherre to go now.HELP!


----------



## Skyeking (Jan 17, 2003)

Hi solly,

I'm so sorry to hear about this. 

Animal cruelty comes in many forms, from actual shooting to just plain old neglect, ignorance and selfishness-not doing what is actually in the birds best interest.

Where are the scanned pics now, do you have them stored in your picture file or web file? What size are they?


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

Hello Solly, 

As you say, this woman is probably not a bad person, and has good intentions. Perhaps you could inform her that there are web-sites on the internet where a person can inform themselves of how to better help injured animals which cannot be taken to an animal shelter for whatever reason. 

Perhaps she does not have internet, but perhaps someone else can help. 

We (I) have been in the situation where we wanted to help an animal, but maybe did more harm than good, out of ignorance. Increasing availability and accessibility of on-line resources is making some changes to this limitation. 

In your dealings with his person, take care of yourself first. That is your first obligation. If you cannot talk calmly and rationally with someone you wish to help, you cannot expect them to take you seriously. I am not saying that this is the case with you; I am saying it for myself and others as well. We don't want to achieve results opposite to those we set out to achieve. Focus on the health and well-being of the animal, forget recriminations and blame and punishments and retribution and whatever. Look at your goal, and when talking to others about the bird, focus on the end result.

When talking to officials, talk about what the bird needs for optimum health, not about what should be done to or with the lady. That will help demonstrate your sincerity, that you are interested in the bird (and other animals), and that you are not using the bird as a convenient pretext to finally carry out some hidden agenda against the lady. 

When we have perceived enemies, we sometimes watch and wait for them to make a mis-step or a big mistake so that we can take action.This may be necessary sometimes, but others probably perceive what we are doing and may discount, even disregard some of our claims and assertions and accusations. 

Best of luck,

Larry


----------



## Feefo (Feb 8, 2002)

Although this woman may be hostile to your suggestions at the moment she might act on them anyway.

When we were children my older sister had a white rat which she kept in a large-ish box but uninteresting box and, as she was 15 and chasing boys, she virtually ignored. One day a friend of my mother's visited and said that it was cruel to keep a rat without any stimulation and asked if he could take it because he would provide it with things to run through and climb etc. and make its life more interesting. Fortunately no one objected so Rattie went to live a happier life with Joaquim.

Even though it was not my rat I always felt terrible about the sad life that it had led with us and what he told us about rat care has stuck in my mind for nearly 5 decades.


Hopefully this woman will also start to think of what the pigeon is experiencing and try to meet its needs.

Cynthia


----------



## mr squeaks (Apr 14, 2005)

Larry_Cologne said:


> Hello Solly,
> 
> As you say, this woman is probably not a bad person, and has good intentions. Perhaps you could inform her that there are web-sites on the internet where a person can inform themselves of how to better help injured animals which cannot be taken to an animal shelter for whatever reason.
> 
> ...



BEAUTIFULLY SAID, LARRY...

MY SINCERE and GRATEFUL THANKS!


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

heres photos http://community.webshots.com/user/solly465


----------



## kittypaws (Sep 18, 2005)

Ooohh

Poor woodie - he must be wondering why he lives in such a small, cramped place with no stimulation. It looks like he is indoors too in a utility room perhaps whereas as her other captures ( I see a feral) live in the greenhouse.

RSPCA must be stupid to see that the cage is far too small for such a bird - hopefully as you say you are speaking to a better officer now.

I don't doubt this woman's intentions are honourable and that she really does want to help the birds but some people get a bit strange and obsessed and think they are doing good and really they are blinded by what is right - they like to hold onto their prizes - the poor creatures she is helping. The feral looked Ok too, maybe even he could go too...

I had a cat, Tom, that was always poorly, he was my baby and although I would have loved Tom to be well, the fact that he was always sick, gave me something to nurse, something to care for more intensely than my other cats and made me feel more useful and purposeful - what I am trying to say is that perhaps this woman is the same, the bird is better but she can't let go because she needs something to care for.

I do hope Solly than this can be sorted - that poor pigeon, I can't bear to think of him cooped up like that. 

Tania xx


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

*How much does the re-habber know*

Hello Solly,

Saw the pictures. The cage looks large enough to me. _In a way._ 

How much does a re-habber know? 

Sometimes when I am trying to catch, to help out a bird, I tell someone standing by, watching, perhaps critical, perhaps not, that I rehabilitate pigeons. To deflect any suspicion that I am intentionally harassing the bird, or that I want to put the bird out of its misery.

I do not have a license. If someone sees a person in general trying to catch a dog or cat, an animal which anyone can own, or an animal such as a rat or hamster or snake or frog which is not protected by "hands-off!" laws, people do not object. If it is a rare species, an American bald eagle for example, then they may tend to interfere and want to see your credentials.

But what makes a re-habber? For certain animals, only a vet or someone certified and licensed can be a re-habber. 

The point is, for do-it-yourself-or-it-won't-get-done rehabilitation (that is, if you don't do something, the animal will suffer and die), there is no minimum education required, no set standards. 

The lady may not really be aware that the cage is too small, not really. 

If I take in a sick animal, and bad goes to better, I must be doing something right. If the animal would have gotten better at the same rate by itself, then I at least haven't hurt it. If the situation is bad and stays bad, no improvement in any way, then maybe and probably I am doing something wrong. If it goes from bad to worse, due to my actions, ditto. 

The lady has taken in an injured or sick bird, it has gotten better; the situation can remain static because for the lady it is a closed issue. She has accomplished what she set out to accomplish. 

It takes more education or knowledge of a specific sort to look at the long-term health, living requirements, psychological well-being, social needs of the animal, and in this the lady is demonstrating lack of awareness, ignorance.

To be fair to her, almost all of us know very little of the not-so-obvious needs of other species. Many of us do not consider them because we are not aware that they exist. If we don't take care of our kids or members of own species, they cry and squawk and carry on and vociferously let us know. Communication with other species is very limited. We still see questions in public forums such as newsprint, magazines, television, internet websites, church gatherings, classrooms which ask: can animals think? (Not really, is the usual answer). Do they have feelings? 

Perhaps people who lived closer to nature in the past didn't ask these questions, perhaps were more aware of the answers, but conversely were too busy hunting and catching and raising and eating animals to much care about the answers, thus relied on various scriptures and holy books as the Bible which says humans were given control over animals. 

So, as long as we think this way about other creatures, as long as we have this mind-set, this frame of reference, our way of thinking about other species will be accordingly restricted. 

Just for fun, I Googled "Bible human dominance over animals," and copied from this web-link: (There are other links, perhaps better, perhaps not. I looked at only this one).

http://www.biblestudylessons.com/cgi-bin/topics/animals-inferiority.php

God clearly says from creation that people (male and female) are superior to animals - Gen. 1:26-28; Psalm 8:4-8. Man is more valuable to God than animals - Matt. 10:29-31; 12:11,12; 6:26; 15:26. God authorized man to kill animals for food, but we are not authorized to kill people for food - Gen. 9:2,3; Luke 15:23; Gen. 18:7,8; 27:3,4. God Himself used animal skins to make clothing for Adam and Eve - Gen. 3:21. Numerous Scriptures show people owning and herding animals and using them for their own purposes and prosperity - Psalm 32:9; James 3:3,7.

Men are more intelligent than animals - Job 35:10,11; Psalms 73:22; Hosea 7:11; Psalms 32:9. Because of this superior intelligence, God is able to communicate to man by the written word, the Scriptures - 2 Tim. 3:16,17. What has God written to communicate His will to animals?

Even more important, the Bible clearly teaches that men were created in the image of God - Gen. 1:26-28; 5:1; 9:2-6; James 3:9. This is not said of animals. Men have spirits that are responsible to study God's word and obey it - Job 32:8; Zechariah 12:1; 2 Corinthians 4:16-5:1. Ecclesiastes 3:21 - The spirit of man goes upward, but the spirit of a beast goes down to the earth. There is a sense in which an animal has a spirit - animal life. But it does not continue past death. (Isaiah 31:3)

Men will be judged for their lives, good or bad, and will receive eternal rewards accordingly - Genesis 2:16,17; Ecclesiastes 12:13,14; Hebrews 9:27; Matthew 12:36; Acts 17:30,31; 2 Timothy 3:16,17; Romans 2:6-10; Hebrews 4:9. Animals do not have this moral responsibility - Matthew 7:6; 23:33; 12:34; Acts 20:29,30; Titus 1:12,13; 2 Peter 2:12; Jude 10; 1 Peter 5:8; Proverbs 26:3.

Finally, the most important proof of all is that Jesus died to save mankind - human beings, not animals - Titus 2:11,12; 3:3-7; 1 Timothy 2:4-6; Isaiah 53:5,8; Romans 5:6-9,12,18,19. If God values animals as equally important to man, why did Jesus not die for them? The answer is obvious. Animals have no spirit, no moral responsibility, no eternal destiny, and therefore they are not held accountable for right and wrong. Jesus did not die to save them because they do not need to be saved.

Men are superior to animals in their spirit, their intelligence, their value to God, their moral responsibility, their eternal destiny, and in the price God paid to save them from sin.


Some of us may believe literally in all that a particular version of the Bible says; some not. Discussions on this theme have been going on for millenia. I do not necesarily agree with all that the Bible says, and there are too many contradictions in the Bible for me to start listing them. No offense is meant to anyone reading this. we are all, each and every one of us, different, and on individual journeys at differing rates through life. I listed the above quotes because it gives us an idea of what we as humans must deal with when we discuss animal rights with other humans. 

Larry


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

Larry i do not know how you can say the cage looks big enough to you.Would you like to spend a quarter of a year or more in a box where you couldn't spread your arms out to stretch them,where if you tried to you scraped the ends until they frayed.No i don't think you would. Anyway i have had a phonecall from the rspca this afternoon "my inspector visited the premises today and the bird was released on saturday and flew away okay" HANDS UP WHO BELIEVES THAT!! I got to know this woman over these months and always treated her with respect inviting her out to see the aviary saying how nice it would be to have someone to share my interest in pigeons with.Her husband said on friday my wife is keeping the pigeon,we're building a bigger cage for it in the garage,i'll do away with it before you get it.There's no way she would have just let it go and hopefully on the photo where the pigeon is sideways on you can see the ends all frayed so would it have flown alright?Oh well can't do no more...The photos show the greenhouse which they use as an aviary,there are pigeons in there and yes they did look healthy so basically don't know why they were in there.There were pigeons on the roof which were probably rescues,she told me about 2 babies rescued from a building which she handraised and they like to go back in the greenhouse at night.So i'm not saying this woman is all wrong.Like i said to the rspca inspector she needs educating about what to feed and that,but in the case of the woodpigeon in my opinion she couldn't have been MORE WRONG!And also i think the rspca failed,they could have asked if they could witness the release but apparantly they have no control over anything so what DO they do! Anyway i'm still bitter and wish i had just sorted it myself!


----------



## Larry_Cologne (Jul 6, 2004)

*Smallish cage*

Hello Solly,

Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh.

Looks like I'm stepping in it.

Of course I didn't think the cage was large enough, not by any means.

I said, "Looks like the cage is large enough. _In a way."_ (_In a way_ is in italics).

What I was inferring, perhaps, unsuccessfully, it seems, is that a person uneducated in the needs of a wood pigeon might see the cage as large enough. Or a teenager, perhaps, more involved in boyfriends, girlfriends, music, school. Anyone with matters that are more pressing or urgent to them as far as they are concerned. Before judging someone if I must, I try to find out what they know, "where they are coming from." You are the person on the scene, and know more about the situation than we can. Basically I agree with you about the wood pigeon.

If you were to tell me that you are transporting the bird from an aviary for a visit to the vet, then yes, I woulld suppose the cage is large enough. If you were to say the pigeon had a broken wing, which was bandaged, then the cage would probably be large enough. Is any cage large enough for an animal which by nature cannot be successfully confined in any way whatsoever? I am not an expert on that, so I cannot say, and if someone were to tell me that experts say you can keep injured elephants in shoeboxes, I might have to accept it. 

Simply put, what may seem large enough to some might be known to be inadequate to those better informed.

There was a racehorse euthanized the other day (in the news). I have read that quarter horses are so nervous that rarely can they recover from broken legs, and have to be shot. I always question this, but I am not the expert, and so have to accept it as probably true, unless someday I learn more. 

I never mean to ruffle any feathers, because I see no point in doing so. If I were to encounter someone who says he likes to eat animals alive, I know that I will not influence him if I get upset while talking with him, and must use an approach that might work. I might try to demonstrate to him that the animal suffers pain, and if he acknowledges that he is aware of that and that is why he does it, then I might try another tack, but don't ask me right now what that would be. I still have a lot to learn. 

Hoping for the best, respectfully,

Larry


----------



## solly (Jul 18, 2005)

okay i guess i misunderstood Larry but just knowing that the woodie had been in this cage for the 3 months i have known of still sickens me.Oh well hope they have released it and it was okay.We'll see!!!


----------



## arnieismybaby (Jul 24, 2006)

I've been away for ages, been so busy, and the first thread I see is this one. 

Really upset me to read about this poor bird. The cage he is homed in is the exact same cage that my Nanday Conure lives in. He is a small bird, and the cage is plenty big enough for him, but sometimes I think he could do with something a bit bigger. Mind you, my conure only sleeps in his cage, the rest of the day he isn't in it.

I hope that you find an RSPCA officer who really will take notice and do something positive. As a few other members have said, the intentions of your neighbour is there, but possibly just need educating concerning looking after wild birds, and pigeons/wood pigeons in particular.

Michelle.


----------

