"Digital_Cowboy"  wrote in message
news:38brjlF5kllroU1{at}individual.net...
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This is an open letter to all of you out there who seem to think that ANY
> house can be made to be "bird safe."  The house that I am
living in with
> my Grandmother is at least 100 yrs old.  The interior walls are made out
> of plaster and lathe construction.  When the house was made it was a
> COMMON practice to put arsenic into the plaster.  The theory is/was that
> rats and mice coming into the home would chew on the wall, ingesting the
> plaster and arsenic.  They would then crawl away and die somewhere.
>
> Now then given that parrots ARE chewers, IF a parrot is allowed "free"
> range in such a house they would end up chewing the plaster on the wall,
> ingesting some of it, and along with the plaster end up ingesting the
> arsenic.  Which would result in the birds either getting sick (depending
> upon how much was ingested) or dieing.
>
> So please tell me given that type of construction short of tearing out
> EVERY wall and ceiling, and basically "rebuilding" the
entire interior of
> the house how is a person suppose to make such a house "bird safe?"
>
> For a multi-floored home with a total of 8 rooms, that is/would be a long
> and expensive proposition, would it not?  As well as still presenting a
> health hazard to any birds that might be in the house at the time.  Cause
> one would have to find some place to put the birds during the
> reconstruction.  Which could be something as simple as just placing the
> birds outside while the work is being done or "boarding"
them somewhere.
>
> I would have to say that given a house that is so constructed that until
> such a time as one could "correct" the "defect(s)"
in the home that the
> BEST course of action to take WOULD be to clip their birds wings.  So that
> while the bird(s) are out of their cage they cannot fly up onto the window
> or door molding and chew on either the wall(s) or the ceiling(s).
>
> Now let the "flames" and "attacks" that I am just
being "lazy" or "cheap"
> commence, as I fully expect that you "anti-wing clippers"
will lunch some
> form of "attack" on me.  As well as continuing to call me a bird
> "mutilator" because I choose to (oh no) clip my birds wings.
>
> Wing clipping does NOT equal mutilation, as it is JUST like a hair cut in
> that the clipped wings can and DO grow back.  IF they didn't then it would
> not be necessary to re-clip after each molt, now would it?
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 8.0.3
>
> iQA/AwUBQiC4kB/i52nbE9vTEQJ5dACg0L764h6x5JgUsGwNZrHSjxUlPQAAnRF8
> uVPWqnHPbVf4ZCGq2crWI5h9
> =yaFX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> Digital_Cowboy
> Live Long and Prosper
> ___________________          _-_
> \==============_=_/ ____.---'---`---.____
>             \_ \    \----._________.----/
>               \ \   /  /    `-_-'
>           __,--`.`-'..'-_
>          /____          ||-
>               `--.____,-'




--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/26/05 5:33:55 PM ---