| Ken |
Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
for a few days until he can fly again.
I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
it a little bit.
The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
able to fend for himself.
|
|
|
| NaDeana |
You need to contact a wildlife rehabilitator in your area. Wire cages
are horrible for wild birds, since it destroys their feathering. If he
is docile and friendly, then he is sick. Seagulls are fiesty little
buggers, even as newly hatched chicks. He is a banded bird, and may have
been a survivor of an oil spill or some other enviromental disaster and
was banded by the proper authorities.
en wrote:
> Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
> trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
> fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
> wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
> for a few days until he can fly again.
>
> I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
> wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
> it a little bit.
>
> The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
> has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
> pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
> pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
> to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
> breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
>
> I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
> don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
> on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
>
> If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
> who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
> don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
> able to fend for himself.
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <jcu2k0lbu65bc5b7uu8dk2ar43pal7m8eu@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
>trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
>fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
>wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
>for a few days until he can fly again.
>
>I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
>wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
>it a little bit.
>
>The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
>has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
>pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
>pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
>to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
>breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
>
>I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
>don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
>on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
>
>If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
>who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
>don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
>able to fend for himself.
What are the numbers and letters, and roughly where are you in the UK?
Both could be useful clues to determining the bird's origin.
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| ex WGS Hamm |
"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:qpSvaRCKYYQBFw5i@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> In article <jcu2k0lbu65bc5b7uu8dk2ar43pal7m8eu@4ax.com>, Ken
> <nospam@myaddress.com> writes
> >Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
> >trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
> >fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
> >wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
> >for a few days until he can fly again.
> >
> >I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
> >wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
> >it a little bit.
> >
> >The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
> >has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
> >pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
> >pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
> >to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
> >breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
> >
> >I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
> >don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
> >on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
> >
> >If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
> >who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
> >don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
> >able to fend for himself.
>
> What are the numbers and letters, and roughly where are you in the UK?
> Both could be useful clues to determining the bird's origin.
Chances are he was rung by ppl who are trying to track flock movements. ANy
idea what type of gull it is?
|
|
|
| Ken |
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 07:17:51 -0300, NaDeana
<nadeana@eastlinkGOTTATAKETHISOUT.ca> wrote:
>You need to contact a wildlife rehabilitator in your area. Wire cages
>are horrible for wild birds, since it destroys their feathering. If he
>is docile and friendly, then he is sick. Seagulls are fiesty little
>buggers, even as newly hatched chicks. He is a banded bird, and may have
>been a survivor of an oil spill or some other enviromental disaster and
>was banded by the proper authorities.
Yeah, I'll get in contact with my vet again and ask him if he knows
anyone. For what it's worth, the seagull is looking a lot better today
- his wing is almost folded across his back like normal.
I don't think he's sick in any other way - the vet checked him over,
gave him an antibiotic shot and said that apart from the wing, he was
in very good shape. He has a good apetite, is nice and fat, has sleek
plumage and bright eyes. I think he's just bored/lonely more than
anything - he paces back and forth in the hutch and starts screeching
when he hears other seagulls (another gull flew down the other day and
started gabbling away at him).
|
|
|
| Ken |
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:34:34 GMT, "ex WGS Hamm"
<alpha.bitchREMOVETHIS@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:qpSvaRCKYYQBFw5i@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> In article <jcu2k0lbu65bc5b7uu8dk2ar43pal7m8eu@4ax.com>, Ken
>> <nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>> >Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
>> >trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
>> >fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
>> >wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
>> >for a few days until he can fly again.
>> >
>> >I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
>> >wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
>> >it a little bit.
>> >
>> >The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
>> >has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
>> >pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
>> >pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
>> >to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
>> >breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
>> >don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
>> >on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
>> >
>> >If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
>> >who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
>> >don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
>> >able to fend for himself.
>>
>> What are the numbers and letters, and roughly where are you in the UK?
>> Both could be useful clues to determining the bird's origin.
> Chances are he was rung by ppl who are trying to track flock movements. ANy
>idea what type of gull it is?
The number is CL258, I think (the ring is pretty scuffed and
scratched). I don't realy know that much about seagulls, so I'll
describe him.
He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
same noise) than the grey seagulls.
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:34:34 GMT, "ex WGS Hamm"
><alpha.bitchREMOVETHIS@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:qpSvaRCKYYQBFw5i@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>>>
>>> In article <jcu2k0lbu65bc5b7uu8dk2ar43pal7m8eu@4ax.com>, Ken
>>> <nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>>> >Saw it on the road with what looked like a broken wing. I managed to
>>> >trap him against a fence and pick him up (he could still run pretty
>>> >fast). I took him to the vet, who examined him and told me that the
>>> >wing wasn't broken, just sprained and that I should take care of him
>>> >for a few days until he can fly again.
>>> >
>>> >I've got him in an old rabbit hutch in my garden at the moment and the
>>> >wing doesn't seem to drooping as much now. He's also started to flap
>>> >it a little bit.
>>> >
>>> >The seagull has a red ring on his leg with numbers and letters, which
>>> >has led me to wonder if the bird is someone's escaped pet. He seems
>>> >pretty docile and friendly when I feed him - he'll take bread and
>>> >pieces of meat from my fingers and just stands there and doesn't try
>>> >to escape when I open the hutch door. I've had experience with
>>> >breeding budgies and a similar type of ring is used on their legs.
>>> >
>>> >I'm not sure if anyone actually breeds seagulls in the UK, though I
>>> >don't suppose that it's outside the realms of possibility. I've looked
>>> >on the web, but I've not been able to find anything.
>>> >
>>> >If the seagull is indeed a pet bird, does anyone have any idea as to
>>> >who I can contact to ensure that he gets reuninted with his master? I
>>> >don't want to release him into the wild if that means that he won't be
>>> >able to fend for himself.
>>>
>>> What are the numbers and letters, and roughly where are you in the UK?
>>> Both could be useful clues to determining the bird's origin.
>> Chances are he was rung by ppl who are trying to track flock movements. ANy
>>idea what type of gull it is?
>
>The number is CL258, I think (the ring is pretty scuffed and
>scratched). I don't realy know that much about seagulls, so I'll
>describe him.
>
>He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>same noise) than the grey seagulls.
If that's all there is on the ring, then it isn't an "official" ring
used for tracking movements, etc., as that would be of hard metal, not
red in colour, and would have both a longer number than that plus an
address which one is asked to notify. For example, rings used in the UK
have "Inform Brit Mus Nat Hist, London" stamped on them.
This sounds much more like some private ring. The bird itself seems to
be a Greater Black-backed Gull from the description - provided the wings
are only black on top and not underneath as well, which should be white.
There should also be a red spot near the tip of the lower half of the
beak. There are a handful of zoos and private bird keepers who have
gulls in their collections, which is why I asked the poster roughly
where in the country he lived, because with that information I may be
able to trace it.
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| nn |
"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
..
>
> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
|
|
|
| Ken |
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 08:10:32 -0500, "nn" <nn@clearlakes.com> wrote:
>
>"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
>news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
>.
>>
>> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>
>FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
I don't really know a whole lot about them aside from the fact that
there seems to be 3 different types (that I've noticed) in England.
The big ones with black wings and a white body on the cock bird and
dull brown hens - this is the great black backed gull right?
Slightly smaller ones with grey/white males and speckled brown
females.
Small, very noisy gulls - a bit bigger than a pigeon where the males
have black heads and the females white heads.
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <h0v5k0h6if3vf7v48vr56dbk5v4qsda4ur@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 08:10:32 -0500, "nn" <nn@clearlakes.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
>>news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
>>.
>>>
>>> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>>> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>>> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>>> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>>
>>FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
>
>I don't really know a whole lot about them aside from the fact that
>there seems to be 3 different types (that I've noticed) in England.
>
>The big ones with black wings and a white body on the cock bird and
>dull brown hens - this is the great black backed gull right?
>
>Slightly smaller ones with grey/white males and speckled brown
>females.
>
>Small, very noisy gulls - a bit bigger than a pigeon where the males
>have black heads and the females white heads.
Could you please tell me roughly where you live, because this may help
me to find out where your gull might have come from?
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <h0v5k0h6if3vf7v48vr56dbk5v4qsda4ur@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 08:10:32 -0500, "nn" <nn@clearlakes.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
>>news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
>>.
>>>
>>> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>>> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>>> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>>> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>>
>>FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
>
>I don't really know a whole lot about them aside from the fact that
>there seems to be 3 different types (that I've noticed) in England.
>
>The big ones with black wings and a white body on the cock bird and
>dull brown hens - this is the great black backed gull right?
>
There is no sex difference in gulls, what you are describing is the
adult and the immature - and it can take 2-4 years for the young birds
to become adult.
White with black wings fits both Great and Lesser Black-backed Gulls,
though the latter is usually more of a dark grey. And yes, the former,
which has pink legs like your bird, is larger than the latter which has
yellow legs.
>Slightly smaller ones with grey/white males and speckled brown
>females.
>
Adult and immatures again. Both Herring and Common Gulls fit this
description, the former (yellow legs) rather larger than the latter
(greenish legs).
>Small, very noisy gulls - a bit bigger than a pigeon where the males
>have black heads and the females white heads.
Black-headed Gulls, which have black heads in summer and white heads in
winter. Their young are speckled, too!
So, that's five different types of gulls breeding in the UK, plus quite
a lot of rare vagrants that come from, e.g. the Arctic or the US, etc.
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
writes
>
>"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
>news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
>.
>>
>> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>
>FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
>
Not really. It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species. The fact
that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the person
using it.
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| nn |
"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:$KIayXkisyQBFwZe@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
> writes
> >
> >"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
> >news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
> >.
> >>
> >> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
> >> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
> >> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
> >> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
> >
> >FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
> >
> Not really.
Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
The fact
> that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the person
> using it.
Has nothing to do with where it is found, its simply an incorrect term.
I assume, like most of us you come here to learn something new, now you
have.
Accept it and use the correct term.
If you don't, and you continually use the wrong term you will likely have
someone like me tell you that you are using an incorrect term.
Nothing personal.
|
|
|
| Dave Bugg |
nn wrote:
> Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
That's correct. The proper name is "Avian Rat".
|
|
|
| Gloria Carr |
"Dave Bugg" <deebuggatcharterdotnet> wrote in message
news:10k79c699sbg60@corp.supernews.com...
> nn wrote:
>
> > Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
>
> That's correct. The proper name is "Avian Rat".
I though that was pigeons?
Oh wait, those are 'Flying Rats'. Nevermind.
Gloria
|
|
|
| Toucanldy |
>From: "Gloria Carr" platedlizard@earthlink.net
>
>"Dave Bugg" <deebuggatcharterdotnet> wrote in message
>news:10k79c699sbg60@corp.supernews.com...
>> nn wrote:
>>
>> > Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
>>
>> That's correct. The proper name is "Avian Rat".
>
>I though that was pigeons?
>
>Oh wait, those are 'Flying Rats'. Nevermind.
>
>Gloria
Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our ecosystem.
Regards
|
|
|
| Gloria Carr |
"Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
>
> >From: "Gloria Carr" platedlizard@earthlink.net
>
> >
> >"Dave Bugg" <deebuggatcharterdotnet> wrote in message
> >news:10k79c699sbg60@corp.supernews.com...
> >> nn wrote:
> >>
> >> > Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect
term.
> >>
> >> That's correct. The proper name is "Avian Rat".
> >
> >I though that was pigeons?
> >
> >Oh wait, those are 'Flying Rats'. Nevermind.
> >
> >Gloria
>
> Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our ecosystem.
I'm probably going to regret this, but...
A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common Rock
Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem? Seriously,
some birds do not belong here.
> Regards
I doubt it.
Gloria
|
|
|
| Paulo |
Mmmm interesting.....were you introduce here? Maybe you dont belong here
either.....
--
Paulo
"Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> >
> > >From: "Gloria Carr" platedlizard@earthlink.net
> >
> > >
> > >"Dave Bugg" <deebuggatcharterdotnet> wrote in message
> > >news:10k79c699sbg60@corp.supernews.com...
> > >> nn wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect
> term.
> > >>
> > >> That's correct. The proper name is "Avian Rat".
> > >
> > >I though that was pigeons?
> > >
> > >Oh wait, those are 'Flying Rats'. Nevermind.
> > >
> > >Gloria
> >
> > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our ecosystem.
>
> I'm probably going to regret this, but...
>
> A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
>
> B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common
Rock
> Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem? Seriously,
> some birds do not belong here.
>
> > Regards
>
> I doubt it.
>
> Gloria
>
>
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <10k6srah0ark09e@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
writes
>
>"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:$KIayXkisyQBFwZe@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
>> writes
>> >
>> >"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
>> >news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
>> >.
>> >>
>> >> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>> >> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>> >> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>> >> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>> >
>> >FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
>> >
>
>> Not really.
>
>Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
>
I would go so far as to agree that there is no such single species of
bird as a seagull, but the word seagull is widely used to indicate any
kind of gull, and especially used by non-experts such as the poster who
used it.
>It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
>> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
>
>Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
>
I do, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone including those who are
not expert birdwatchers can be expected to do so, not least when they
don't have the expertise to identify the species. Yes, the term "gull"
would do, but have you met anyone who doesn't know what is meant by the
word "seagull"?
>The fact
>> that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the person
>> using it.
>
>Has nothing to do with where it is found, its simply an incorrect term.
>
It is only "incorrect" if applied to a particular species that the
observer has already identified. When it was used earlier in this
thread, it was by someone who very obviously wasn't able to identify the
different gulls so he, perfectly correctly, used a common generic name
"seagull".
>I assume, like most of us you come here to learn something new, now you
>have.
ROFL!! I just love it when people make assumptions based on completely
inadequate knowledge. Perhaps if you did a little homework you would
discover why I haven't learnt anything new from this exchange and nor
should I be expected to :-))
>Accept it and use the correct term.
>If you don't, and you continually use the wrong term you will likely have
>someone like me tell you that you are using an incorrect term.
Err, you appear to be getting in a muddle. I didn't use the word
"seagull", I was merely defending someone else's right to do so when you
said it was "incorrect". In the context in which it was used, it was
fine. You knew what was meant by it, I knew what was meant by it, so did
everyone else.
The word exists and will continue to be used whether you, or I, try to
do something about it.
>Nothing personal.
>
Of course not, but then you don't know who I am, do you, or what I do
for a living? If you did, you might not tell me that I have learnt
something new :-))
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Toucanldy |
>From: "Gloria Carr" platedlizard@earthlink.net
>B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common Rock
>Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem? Seriously,
>some birds do not belong here.
Most of your cute "pet birds" are considered either pest species, or dinner, in
their native country.
Some people think if you can't clip it's wings, and put it in a cage, it
doesn't belong here.
Regards
|
|
|
| Abby Normal |
"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DuEV78BQK$QBFwMi@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> In article <10k6srah0ark09e@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
> writes
> >
> >"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:$KIayXkisyQBFwZe@indaal.demon.co.uk...
> >>
> >> In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
> >> writes
> >> >
> >> >"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
> >> >.
> >> >>
> >> >> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
> >> >> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
> >> >> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes
the
> >> >> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
> >> >
> >> >FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
> >> >
> >
> >> Not really.
> >
> >Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
> >
> I would go so far as to agree that there is no such single species of
> bird as a seagull, but the word seagull is widely used to indicate any
> kind of gull, and especially used by non-experts such as the poster who
> used it.
>
> >It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
> >> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
> >
> >Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
> >
> I do, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone including those who are
> not expert birdwatchers can be expected to do so, not least when they
> don't have the expertise to identify the species. Yes, the term "gull"
> would do, but have you met anyone who doesn't know what is meant by the
> word "seagull"?
>
> >The fact
> >> that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the person
> >> using it.
> >
> >Has nothing to do with where it is found, its simply an incorrect term.
> >
> It is only "incorrect" if applied to a particular species that the
> observer has already identified. When it was used earlier in this
> thread, it was by someone who very obviously wasn't able to identify the
> different gulls so he, perfectly correctly, used a common generic name
> "seagull".
>
> >I assume, like most of us you come here to learn something new, now you
> >have.
>
> ROFL!! I just love it when people make assumptions based on completely
> inadequate knowledge. Perhaps if you did a little homework you would
> discover why I haven't learnt anything new from this exchange and nor
> should I be expected to :-))
>
> >Accept it and use the correct term.
> >If you don't, and you continually use the wrong term you will likely
have
> >someone like me tell you that you are using an incorrect term.
>
> Err, you appear to be getting in a muddle. I didn't use the word
> "seagull", I was merely defending someone else's right to do so when you
> said it was "incorrect". In the context in which it was used, it was
> fine. You knew what was meant by it, I knew what was meant by it, so did
> everyone else.
>
> The word exists and will continue to be used whether you, or I, try to
> do something about it.
>
> >Nothing personal.
> >
> Of course not, but then you don't know who I am, do you, or what I do
> for a living? If you did, you might not tell me that I have learnt
> something new :-))
>
> --
> Malcolm
Kind of sad when people choose to remain ignorant.
I guess that's why we have such a close presidential race.
The fact is seagull is incorrect. The person simply pointed that out to you.
You can expect that when you post to a public forum.
No need to get your shorts in a bunch.
Uneducated in correct terminology is excusable, we all have things to
learn, and most of us enjoy learning and don't become defensive about it
when corrected.
Once you know you are using an incorrect term and think its cute, smart or
funny to continue to use the term
that makes you ignorant by choice.
|
|
|
| Marion Margoshes |
Quit !!!!!!! Both of you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ar.co
m> wrote in message news:10k8lobf3q9bkdf@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:DuEV78BQK$QBFwMi@indaal.demon.co.uk...
> >
> > In article <10k6srah0ark09e@corp.supernews.com>, nn <nn@clearlakes.com>
> > writes
> > >
> > >"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >news:$KIayXkisyQBFwZe@indaal.demon.co.uk...
> > >>
> > >> In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn
<nn@clearlakes.com>
> > >> writes
> > >> >
> > >> >"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
> > >> >news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
> > >> >.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
> > >> >> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow
beak,
> > >> >> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes
> the
> > >> >> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
> > >> >
> > >> >FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
> > >> >
> > >
> > >> Not really.
> > >
> > >Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
> > >
> > I would go so far as to agree that there is no such single species of
> > bird as a seagull, but the word seagull is widely used to indicate any
> > kind of gull, and especially used by non-experts such as the poster who
> > used it.
> >
> > >It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
> > >> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
> > >
> > >Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
> > >
> > I do, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone including those who are
> > not expert birdwatchers can be expected to do so, not least when they
> > don't have the expertise to identify the species. Yes, the term "gull"
> > would do, but have you met anyone who doesn't know what is meant by the
> > word "seagull"?
> >
> > >The fact
> > >> that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the
person
> > >> using it.
> > >
> > >Has nothing to do with where it is found, its simply an incorrect term.
> > >
> > It is only "incorrect" if applied to a particular species that the
> > observer has already identified. When it was used earlier in this
> > thread, it was by someone who very obviously wasn't able to identify the
> > different gulls so he, perfectly correctly, used a common generic name
> > "seagull".
> >
> > >I assume, like most of us you come here to learn something new, now you
> > >have.
> >
> > ROFL!! I just love it when people make assumptions based on completely
> > inadequate knowledge. Perhaps if you did a little homework you would
> > discover why I haven't learnt anything new from this exchange and nor
> > should I be expected to :-))
> >
> > >Accept it and use the correct term.
> > >If you don't, and you continually use the wrong term you will likely
> have
> > >someone like me tell you that you are using an incorrect term.
> >
> > Err, you appear to be getting in a muddle. I didn't use the word
> > "seagull", I was merely defending someone else's right to do so when you
> > said it was "incorrect". In the context in which it was used, it was
> > fine. You knew what was meant by it, I knew what was meant by it, so did
> > everyone else.
> >
> > The word exists and will continue to be used whether you, or I, try to
> > do something about it.
> >
> > >Nothing personal.
> > >
> > Of course not, but then you don't know who I am, do you, or what I do
> > for a living? If you did, you might not tell me that I have learnt
> > something new :-))
> >
> > --
> > Malcolm
>
> Kind of sad when people choose to remain ignorant.
> I guess that's why we have such a close presidential race.
>
> The fact is seagull is incorrect. The person simply pointed that out to
you.
> You can expect that when you post to a public forum.
> No need to get your shorts in a bunch.
> Uneducated in correct terminology is excusable, we all have things to
> learn, and most of us enjoy learning and don't become defensive about it
> when corrected.
> Once you know you are using an incorrect term and think its cute, smart or
> funny to continue to use the term
> that makes you ignorant by choice.
>
>
|
|
|
| Mamabird |
"Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040912072220.29586.00000355@mb-m02.aol.com...
>
> >From: "Gloria Carr" platedlizard@earthlink.net
>
> >B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common
Rock
> >Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
Seriously,
> >some birds do not belong here.
>
> Most of your cute "pet birds" are considered either pest species, or
dinner, in
> their native country.
> Some people think if you can't clip it's wings, and put it in a cage, it
> doesn't belong here.
>
> Regards
Great point! You go girl!
--
Mama
~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <dUY0d.29728$bE1.15404586@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>, Marion
Margoshes <mbm1234@optonline.net> writes
>Quit !!!!!!! Both of you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
Yes, ma'am!
Soon :-)
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <10k8lobf3q9bkdf@corp.supernews.com>, Abby Normal
<nan@clear.com> writes
>
>Kind of sad when people choose to remain ignorant.
>I guess that's why we have such a close presidential race.
>
>The fact is seagull is incorrect.
It was NOT incorrect in the manner in which he used it, as it was a
perfectly understood term which, being used by a non-expert, conveyed
exactly the meaning it was meant to do.
> The person simply pointed that out to you.
No, wrong, it wasn't pointed out to me. The person pointing it out did
so to the original poster who started this thread, who was not by any
means an expert birder, but very much someone who could recognise the
bird as a gull, but who didn't know which species it was and who used
the word seagull in exactly the same way as vast numbers of non-birdy
people use it. And everyone here, including you and the person who
thought to make a point, understood *exactly* what he meant, didn't you?
>You can expect that when you post to a public forum.
>No need to get your shorts in a bunch.
They aren't, I do assure you!
> Uneducated in correct terminology is excusable, we all have things to
>learn, and most of us enjoy learning and don't become defensive about it
>when corrected.
No defensiveness here, merely a feeling that a little tolerance towards
the original poster, making allowances for him being a non-expert who
would automatically use the word which he knew best, was in order. And
please read back through the thread and get it into your head that it
was not me that was being corrected but the original poster who was not,
in any sense, a bird expert. I merely picked up on the correction
because I thought it showed a lack of tolerance to someone seeking
information about a bird of whose identity he was by no means certain.
>Once you know you are using an incorrect term and think its cute, smart or
>funny to continue to use the term
>that makes you ignorant by choice.
>
It isn't a question of thinking it is "cute" or "smart", or anything
else. And I'm certainly not being defensive. It is a question of being
tolerant when a non-birder uses the term and ignorance doesn't actually
come into it, you are making the same mistake of assuming too much based
on no knowledge about me. As a professional who earns most of my living
by studying and writing about birds, including gulls, if I am writing a
scientific paper about gulls, I would not use the word "seagull". If, as
I have done, I am writing a popular article for non-birders, I might
well point out that while I was mentioning several different species of
gulls, it was common parlance to lump them all under the term "seagull".
It is common parlance to call small sandpipers "peeps" in the US, though
not all of them go "peep", and many people lump all birds of prey and
call them "hawks", though many are not. It really doesn't matter
provided the person using the terms knows what he means and the person
reading or hearing it understands. In the case of seagull, can you think
of anyone who wouldn't, and indeed didn't, immediately understand which
group of birds was being referred to?
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Mamabird |
"Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> >
> > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our ecosystem.
>
> I'm probably going to regret this, but...
>
> A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
> B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common
Rock
> Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem? Seriously,
> some birds do not belong here.
Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in several
parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty rats?"
--
Mama
~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse that that
in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this one God
help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
Bob Wheeler
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
news:9%_0d.24120$Wv5.3465@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> "Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> > >
> > > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our ecosystem.
> >
>
> > I'm probably going to regret this, but...
> >
> > A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
>
> Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
>
> > B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the common
> Rock
> > Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
Seriously,
> > some birds do not belong here.
>
> Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in several
> parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty rats?"
> --
> Mama
> ~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
> Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
>
|
|
|
| Dave Bugg |
Gloria Carr wrote:
> A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
Yeah, we was joking. Gloria, did you get those avian rat-traps I sent?
|
|
|
| Dave Bugg |
Wheeler wrote:
> Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse
> that that in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch
> over this one God help all when I start chatting about pussy cats.
> VBEG.
Dead cats make great dusters.... the tail is an excellent handle. :-)
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
There are only two kinds of cats on the planet, "good cats and bad cats" I
like good cats...................
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"Dave Bugg" <deebuggatcharterdotnet> wrote in message
news:10k90ent9re279a@corp.supernews.com...
> Wheeler wrote:
> > Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse
> > that that in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch
> > over this one God help all when I start chatting about pussy cats.
> > VBEG.
>
> Dead cats make great dusters.... the tail is an excellent handle. :-)
>
>
|
|
|
| ex WGS Hamm |
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse that
that
> in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this one God
> help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
>
Please don't Bob. You know I am a cat lover :0(
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
And how could I know you are a cat lover, no signature, you could be that
city "person" who likes to dump unwanted cats on my parrot farm. ;0P
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"ex WGS Hamm" <alpha.bitchREMOVETHIS@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:As21d.2439$9S2.2059@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> > Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse that
> that
> > in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this one
God
> > help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
> >
> Please don't Bob. You know I am a cat lover :0(
>
>
|
|
|
| Phillip Sherman |
nn wrote:
> "Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
> news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
> .
>
>>He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a chicken,
>>very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow beak,
>>green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he makes the
>>same noise) than the grey seagulls.
>
>
> FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
>
>
Didn't you mean "sea"gull is an incorrect terN :-)
--
I live in ZONE 9B-10A-SUNSET ZONE 25
The zone splits in my City
I LIVE ON THE TREASURE COAST OF FLORIDA
http://community.webshots.com/user/captphill
|
|
|
| ex WGS Hamm |
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10k9dlckl7mh7ab@corp.supernews.com...
> And how could I know you are a cat lover, no signature, you could be that
> city "person" who likes to dump unwanted cats on my parrot farm. ;0P
>
Oops, I forgot I had changed my name. Tis *I* oldmolly. Being cyber stalked
so got rid of any reference to molly.
Not a city person, nor likely to dump any of my cats anywhere.I get really
really upset and end up crying when people advocate doing dreadful things to
cats. We seem to ahve moved back to medieval thinking when cats were accused
of being creatures of beelzebub and blamed for causing everything from
plague to milk fever.
I love my birds, I love all birds, but I love my cats too.
|
|
|
| Mamabird |
No bunched panties here. I was just dropping my 2 centavos into the
conversation.
--
Mama
~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse that
that
> in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this one
God
> help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
>
> Bob Wheeler
>
> --
> Check out our web site,
> A few new features and new pictures.
> http://www.onemorebird.com/
>
>
> "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> news:9%_0d.24120$Wv5.3465@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > "Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > > "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> > > >
> > > > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our
ecosystem.
> > >
> >
> > > I'm probably going to regret this, but...
> > >
> > > A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
> >
> > Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
> >
> > > B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the
common
> > Rock
> > > Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
> Seriously,
> > > some birds do not belong here.
> >
> > Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in
several
> > parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty rats?"
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
Cats are most likeable, they are however preditors. I attempt to keep the
number of risk factors low in my avian community. VBG.
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"ex WGS Hamm" <alpha.bitchREMOVETHIS@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:SDe1d.800$5K3.424@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> news:10k9dlckl7mh7ab@corp.supernews.com...
> > And how could I know you are a cat lover, no signature, you could be
that
> > city "person" who likes to dump unwanted cats on my parrot farm. ;0P
> >
> Oops, I forgot I had changed my name. Tis *I* oldmolly. Being cyber
stalked
> so got rid of any reference to molly.
> Not a city person, nor likely to dump any of my cats anywhere.I get
really
> really upset and end up crying when people advocate doing dreadful things
to
> cats. We seem to ahve moved back to medieval thinking when cats were
accused
> of being creatures of beelzebub and blamed for causing everything from
> plague to milk fever.
> I love my birds, I love all birds, but I love my cats too.
>
>
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
Understood Mammy, but I thought the Tucan lady was commenting on the pretty
rats, were that you?
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
news:8Li1d.186$mb6.70@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> No bunched panties here. I was just dropping my 2 centavos into the
> conversation.
> --
> Mama
> ~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
> Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
>
> "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> > Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse that
> that
> > in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this one
> God
> > help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
> >
> > Bob Wheeler
> >
> > --
> > Check out our web site,
> > A few new features and new pictures.
> > http://www.onemorebird.com/
> >
> >
> > "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> > news:9%_0d.24120$Wv5.3465@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > "Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > >
> > > > "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our
> ecosystem.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > I'm probably going to regret this, but...
> > > >
> > > > A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
> > >
> > > Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
> > >
> > > > B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the
> common
> > > Rock
> > > > Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
> > Seriously,
> > > > some birds do not belong here.
> > >
> > > Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in
> several
> > > parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty
rats?"
>
|
|
|
| Mamabird |
That were me, Mr. Wheeler. :)
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10kbkp0ighkf270@corp.supernews.com...
> Understood Mammy, but I thought the Tucan lady was commenting on the
pretty
> rats, were that you?
>
> Bob W
>
> --
> Check out our web site,
> A few new features and new pictures.
> http://www.onemorebird.com/
>
>
> "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> news:8Li1d.186$mb6.70@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > No bunched panties here. I was just dropping my 2 centavos into the
> > conversation.
> > --
> > Mama
> > ~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
> > Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
> > ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
> >
> > "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> > news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse
that
> > that
> > > in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this
one
> > God
> > > help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
> > >
> > > Bob Wheeler
> > >
> > > --
> > > Check out our web site,
> > > A few new features and new pictures.
> > > http://www.onemorebird.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> > > news:9%_0d.24120$Wv5.3465@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > > "Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our
> > ecosystem.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I'm probably going to regret this, but...
> > > > >
> > > > > A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
> > > >
> > > > Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
> > > >
> > > > > B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the
> > common
> > > > Rock
> > > > > Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
> > > Seriously,
> > > > > some birds do not belong here.
> > > >
> > > > Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in
> > several
> > > > parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty
> rats?"
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Toucanldy |
>From: Phillip Sherman captphill@adelphia.net
>Didn't you mean "sea"gull is an incorrect terN :-)
You just took a tern for the worst. :o)
Regards
|
|
|
| Stroud |
On 11-Sep-2004, "nn" <nn@clearlakes.com> wrote:
> Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect term.
>> It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
>> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
> Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
Hmm?? Jonathan Livingstone Gull ??
Seagull sounds much better IMO.
Why don't you lighten up a little?
Everything doesn't necessarily have to be strictly
black or white, gasoline or petrol.
Birdman.
|
|
|
| Toucanldy |
>From: Phillip Sherman captphill@adelphia.net
>Didn't you mean "sea"gull is an incorrect terN :-)
You just took a tern for the worst. :o)
Regards
|
|
|
| ex WGS Hamm |
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10kbklap4job5f8@corp.supernews.com...
> Cats are most likeable, they are however preditors. I attempt to keep the
> number of risk factors low in my avian community. VBG.
>
I understand you Bob I really do :0)
If my cats posed any danger to any of my birds I would be mortified.
However as they don't but they keep stray cats away from the aviaries and
mice away too we are all content. The communal aviary with tiels, gcc and
canaries is immediately outside the back door with the cat flap in and the
cats don't even look at the aviary birds as they go outside :0)
I guess training and being vigil is the way it works here but I agree that
a stray cat would be a different matter.
That doesn't apply in my case luckily as my own cats take great exception to
any strange moggie with designs on their dinner plate.
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
Well then dang, I rekon they is all rats, just keep them cats away. :0)
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
news:Exk1d.263$mb6.262@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> That were me, Mr. Wheeler. :)
>
> "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> news:10kbkp0ighkf270@corp.supernews.com...
> > Understood Mammy, but I thought the Tucan lady was commenting on the
> pretty
> > rats, were that you?
> >
> > Bob W
> >
> > --
> > Check out our web site,
> > A few new features and new pictures.
> > http://www.onemorebird.com/
> >
> >
> > "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> > news:8Li1d.186$mb6.70@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > No bunched panties here. I was just dropping my 2 centavos into the
> > > conversation.
> > > --
> > > Mama
> > > ~^~^~^~ Visit Mamabird's Nest: <http://iluvbirds.tripod.com/> And My
> > > Photo Albums at: <http://photos.yahoo.com/iluvbirdz>
> > > ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
> > >
> > > "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> > > news:10k9022kko297fd@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > Well actually, Quakers who have gone feral have been called worse
> that
> > > that
> > > > in some communities. If you get your panties in a bunch over this
> one
> > > God
> > > > help all when I start chatting about pussy cats. VBEG.
> > > >
> > > > Bob Wheeler
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Check out our web site,
> > > > A few new features and new pictures.
> > > > http://www.onemorebird.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Mamabird" <mybirdeezR@home.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:9%_0d.24120$Wv5.3465@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > > > "Gloria Carr" <platedlizard@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:LqP0d.13509$w%6.3620@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Toucanldy" <toucanldy@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:20040911225956.22107.00003411@mb-m07.aol.com...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will you people never learn? They all have a purpose in our
> > > ecosystem.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm probably going to regret this, but...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A) Some people here need to lighten up, me and Dave were joking.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your next paragraph doesn't sound like you were joking.
> > > > >
> > > > > > B) Since when does a non-native, introduced species such as the
> > > common
> > > > > Rock
> > > > > > Dove (aka pigeon) have any place in North America's ecosystem?
> > > > Seriously,
> > > > > > some birds do not belong here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do the many flocks of wild parrots that have taken up residence in
> > > several
> > > > > parts of the US belong here? Maybe they should be called "pretty
> > rats?"
> > >
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
| Wheeler |
LOL, Molly dear when your cats pose any danger to your birds you may be
mortified but the bird will still be dead!
Bob W
--
Check out our web site,
A few new features and new pictures.
http://www.onemorebird.com/
"ex WGS Hamm" <alpha.bitchREMOVETHIS@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:4Dn1d.888$A96.83@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
> news:10kbklap4job5f8@corp.supernews.com...
> > Cats are most likeable, they are however preditors. I attempt to keep
the
> > number of risk factors low in my avian community. VBG.
> >
> I understand you Bob I really do :0)
> If my cats posed any danger to any of my birds I would be mortified.
> However as they don't but they keep stray cats away from the aviaries and
> mice away too we are all content. The communal aviary with tiels, gcc and
> canaries is immediately outside the back door with the cat flap in and the
> cats don't even look at the aviary birds as they go outside :0)
> I guess training and being vigil is the way it works here but I agree
that
> a stray cat would be a different matter.
> That doesn't apply in my case luckily as my own cats take great exception
to
> any strange moggie with designs on their dinner plate.
>
>
|
|
|
| ex WGS Hamm |
"Wheeler" <rivercst@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:10kc36br50gl2a7@corp.supernews.com...
> LOL, Molly dear when your cats pose any danger to your birds you may be
> mortified but the bird will still be dead!
>
I would not allow it to get to that stage. Thats why I take the trouble to
train the cats and never allow the birds and cats to be loose in the same
room at the same time. My cats will not even catch wild birds outside.
After keeping birds and cats together since I was in my early 20's and not
having anything untoward happen, I think I have got the hang of it :0)
It takes a lot of hard work and you must always expect the unexpected and
take every measure but it *can* be done.
I'm not advocating it though as I freely admit I am rather dotty and put in
more than what perhaps the average pet owner would in terms of vigilance and
training but that's not news to anyone here is it ;0)(the dotty bit I mean)
|
|
|
| Ken |
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:39:56 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Could you please tell me roughly where you live, because this may help
>me to find out where your gull might have come from?
I actually found out who the gull belonged to - and yes, it turned out
to be someone's 'pet' bird.
I rang up the vet at the weekend and asked about any rehabbers in the
area - I spoke to a different vet who knew of a guy who takes in
injured animals and has a large collection of lame gulls that he takes
care of.
I rang him up and arranged to go to his house with the gull. As it
turns out, the bird is one of his - actually it's his 'house gull',
named Susie. She (as it turns out) has been with him for more than 20
years, he having received her as a fully-grown adult. So, she's
actually a very old bird indeed. She was brought up from a baby by
someone who kept her in their house as a pet and is completely used to
humans and knows little about how to be a gull.
As a result, she would completely ignore the other gulls she was
placed with (he has a very large run in his back garden for the ones
that are unfit to be released to the wild) and for some reason, the
other birds would take exception to this and gang up on her, though
due to her large size and strength, they always came out worse. He was
telling me about how Susie would actually try to kill the other gulls
that crossed her. So, he ended up keeping her with him in his house as
part of the family, as she was fine around people. She could have
flown away at any time when she was let out, yet she chose to stay.
He never bothered to clip her wings as she would never fly far from
her home - until last week when she just vanished (and somehow found
her way to me, the worse for wear - maybe the wild gulls had been
attacking her and scared her away or something).
It was quite amazing to see this huge bird letting him hold her and
stoke her belly...
All's well that ends well. I guess.
|
|
|
| Toucanldy |
..
>From: Ken nospam@myaddress.com
>I actually found out who the gull belonged to - and yes, it turned out
>to be someone's 'pet' bird.
Thanks for the update. :)
Regards
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <04pdk0hlrhfqt39hums12i9ejccnae9fju@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:39:56 +0100, Malcolm
><Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Could you please tell me roughly where you live, because this may help
>>me to find out where your gull might have come from?
>
>I actually found out who the gull belonged to - and yes, it turned out
>to be someone's 'pet' bird.
>
snip
>
>It was quite amazing to see this huge bird letting him hold her and
>stoke her belly...
>
>All's well that ends well. I guess.
What a lovely story. Great news and huge credit to you for rescuing the
bird and taking it to the vet. Some people might not have bothered.
--
Malcolm
|
|
|
| Al Johnston |
Way to go, Ken! And Malcolm this energetic bebate about "sea"gulls was all
for naught because, all along it was a "house"gull. Still, you made a very
persuasive argument. Next time I read about "sea"gulls in the newspaper,
I'll try to be more understanding.
Al
"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:U2yQddiMlvRBFwmP@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> In article <04pdk0hlrhfqt39hums12i9ejccnae9fju@4ax.com>, Ken
> <nospam@myaddress.com> writes
> >On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:39:56 +0100, Malcolm
> ><Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>Could you please tell me roughly where you live, because this may help
> >>me to find out where your gull might have come from?
> >
> >I actually found out who the gull belonged to - and yes, it turned out
> >to be someone's 'pet' bird.
> >
> snip
> >
> >It was quite amazing to see this huge bird letting him hold her and
> >stoke her belly...
> >
> >All's well that ends well. I guess.
>
> What a lovely story. Great news and huge credit to you for rescuing the
> bird and taking it to the vet. Some people might not have bothered.
>
> --
> Malcolm
|
|
|
| LadyTech |
"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
news:04pdk0hlrhfqt39hums12i9ejccnae9fju@4ax.com...
>
> It was quite amazing to see this huge bird letting him hold her and
> stoke her belly...
>
> All's well that ends well. I guess.
I love it! Great to know the bird is back home! :-)
|
|
|
| LadyTech |
"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DuEV78BQK$QBFwMi@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> In article <10k6srah0ark09e@corp.supernews.com>, nn
<nn@clearlakes.com>
> writes
> >
> >"Malcolm" <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:$KIayXkisyQBFwZe@indaal.demon.co.uk...
> >>
> >> In article <10k5ubq6tusq288@corp.supernews.com>, nn
<nn@clearlakes.com>
> >> writes
> >> >
> >> >"Ken" <nospam@myaddress.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:u9m5k0h10djoaf2cug6luu21knhaa7ij4n@4ax.com...
> >> >.
> >> >>
> >> >> He's a very big, 'chunky' bird, quite a bit larger than a
chicken,
> >> >> very wide and muscular, white body, black wings, hooked yellow
beak,
> >> >> green eyes, pink legs. He also has a deeper voice (though he
makes the
> >> >> same noise) than the grey seagulls.
> >> >
> >> >FYI: "sea"gull is an incorrect term
> >> >
> >
> >> Not really.
> >
> >Yes really, there is No such bird as a seagull. Its an incorrect
term.
> >
> I would go so far as to agree that there is no such single species
of
> bird as a seagull, but the word seagull is widely used to indicate
any
> kind of gull, and especially used by non-experts such as the poster
who
> used it.
>
> >It is a widely used and understood term that usefully
> >> embraces all gulls without trying to identify any one species.
> >
> >Then call it a gull, not a seagull.
> >
> I do, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone including those who
are
> not expert birdwatchers can be expected to do so, not least when
they
> don't have the expertise to identify the species. Yes, the term
"gull"
> would do, but have you met anyone who doesn't know what is meant by
the
> word "seagull"?
>
> >The fact
> >> that some gulls appear well inland doesn't really matter to the
person
> >> using it.
> >
> >Has nothing to do with where it is found, its simply an incorrect
term.
> >
> It is only "incorrect" if applied to a particular species that the
> observer has already identified. When it was used earlier in this
> thread, it was by someone who very obviously wasn't able to identify
the
> different gulls so he, perfectly correctly, used a common generic
name
> "seagull".
>
> >I assume, like most of us you come here to learn something new, now
you
> >have.
>
> ROFL!! I just love it when people make assumptions based on
completely
> inadequate knowledge. Perhaps if you did a little homework you would
> discover why I haven't learnt anything new from this exchange and
nor
> should I be expected to :-))
>
> >Accept it and use the correct term.
> >If you don't, and you continually use the wrong term you will
likely have
> >someone like me tell you that you are using an incorrect term.
>
> Err, you appear to be getting in a muddle. I didn't use the word
> "seagull", I was merely defending someone else's right to do so when
you
> said it was "incorrect". In the context in which it was used, it was
> fine. You knew what was meant by it, I knew what was meant by it, so
did
> everyone else.
>
> The word exists and will continue to be used whether you, or I, try
to
> do something about it.
>
> >Nothing personal.
> >
> Of course not, but then you don't know who I am, do you, or what I
do
> for a living? If you did, you might not tell me that I have learnt
> something new :-))
>
> --
> Malcolm
If they live by the sea then why not call them seagulls? Then if they
live by the bay couldn't we call them "baygulls" (bagels)? LOL!! just
a joke! ;-)
|
|
|
| Ken |
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:18 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>There is no sex difference in gulls, what you are describing is the
>adult and the immature - and it can take 2-4 years for the young birds
>to become adult.
So how do the gulls themselves tell male from female? Voice? Smell?
I had automatically assumed that the male gulls displayed their bright
beaks and plumage in competition for females in the same way that male
ducks do, that the males would always be larger and more aggressive
and that any fighting/squabbling/jostling for perches I saw between
white gulls was 'rutting' behavior for the benefit of the ladies...
Guess it goes to show just how easy it is to get things wrong with
regard to birds. ;)
|
|
|
| Malcolm |
In article <d4agk013hdkvnmgdt023dkokpp2sdlct7u@4ax.com>, Ken
<nospam@myaddress.com> writes
>On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:42:18 +0100, Malcolm
><Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>There is no sex difference in gulls, what you are describing is the
>>adult and the immature - and it can take 2-4 years for the young birds
>>to become adult.
>
>So how do the gulls themselves tell male from female? Voice? Smell?
>
Voice, certainly, and behaviour. If you're a male and indulge in your
male courtship behaviour towards another bird you'll quickly discover if
it reacts as a male or a female! Birds' sense of smell is poorly
developed in most species so that is unlikely to be involved.
>I had automatically assumed that the male gulls displayed their bright
>beaks and | | | |
