I stand by my point. You could have your loving bird on your shoulder for 30
years and never have anything wrong happen. But it only takes one time.
Besides, why would you want to put your flock mate's head higher than yours?
There are more than a few reasons why you might not want to do that.
Training and dominance are two.
Alex is my B&G baby. He never bites me. But his head is never higher than
mine and I never let him ride on my shoulder. I can rock him like a baby and
he loves his tummy scratched.
I had a friend that has a wonderful Too. 6 years old and a darling. Everyone
can pet her and she loves to show off. One day my friend bent over while the
Too was on top of the cage. The too reached down to nibble on my friends ear
(a kiss). Someone slammed a door. My friend ended up with a hole in her ear
that you could almost put a hot dog into.
I respect your point of view. But many have families have dogs, cats, and
all sorts of animals that are sweat and loving and that would never harm
them and thousands of people end up in the ER each year, sent there by their
own stupidity or their lack of understanding one simple point. The animal is
what it is. It is not a person no matter how much they seem to act like us.
And they DO react out of fear in they only way that has worked for them in
nature. They scratch or bite.
Vision
> I stand by my point. You could have your loving bird on your shoulder for 30
> years and never have anything wrong happen. But it only takes one time.
>
> Besides, why would you want to put your flock mate's head higher than yours?
> There are more than a few reasons why you might not want to do that.
> Training and dominance are two.
So you still believe in the antique 'dominance theory'?
I didn't realise there was anyone who still believed in the height,
dominance thing, as it has been disproved and widely published.
> Alex is my B&G baby. He never bites me. But his head is never higher than
> mine and I never let him ride on my shoulder. I can rock him like a baby and
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> (a kiss). Someone slammed a door. My friend ended up with a hole in her ear
> that you could almost put a hot dog into.
So what has that got to do with dominance? The bird was startled and
panicked.
Would have happened if the owner was above the bird no doubt.
> I respect your point of view. But many have families have dogs, cats, and
> all sorts of animals that are sweat and loving and that would never harm
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> And they DO react out of fear in they only way that has worked for them in
> nature. They scratch or bite.
If people are so petrified about what might happen to them and what danger
their pet poses, then really they shouldn't keep pets. A bird on the arm or
wrist could *easily* puncutre a vital artery if it bit while panicked,
therefore parrots should not be allowed on your arm either. Let's be
sensible here. I know all of my birds, I will allow some onto my shoulder or
head, and others not and am not worried at all about bites or scratches. I
have 6 dogs, and am not afraid of them biting me, I know they wouldn't.
People are too bound up in myths and 'what if's', they need to chill out and
simply enjoy their pets. If someone wants to have their parrot on their
shoulder, so what?
Vision - 25 Nov 2003 14:58 GMT
Well golly gee, read on please....
> > I stand by my point. You could have your loving bird on your shoulder for
> 30
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> I didn't realise there was anyone who still believed in the height,
> dominance thing, as it has been disproved and widely published.
Yes I do still believe in this "theory". Why? Because it has been observed
in nature time and time again by qualified scientists. Not bird watchers or
bird lovers who have wishful thinking as justification for their opinion.
> > Alex is my B&G baby. He never bites me. But his head is never higher than
> > mine and I never let him ride on my shoulder. I can rock him like a baby
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> simply enjoy their pets. If someone wants to have their parrot on their
> shoulder, so what?
I am not saying anyone should be petrified, just that they should realize
that 300 million years of evolution can not be changed ENTIRELY in one life
time.
While it is possible that a bird could puncture a vital artery the risk is
very low. Birds tend to bite things that they can get their beak around.
You seem to be attempting to turn my point into a raving nut rant about the
dangers of everything that may harm us. That is not what I am saying and I
believe that you realize that fully. If someone wants to have their parrot
on their shoulder fine. All I am attempting to do is point out the potential
risks. That is all. And you must admit that there is a RISK, no matter how
small a risk YOU think there may be.
You really should be a tad more careful in debating this issue. It is not
about right or wrong. It is about a possible risk. You post here allot and
have given some outstanding advise. Because of this, some newer folks may
take what you comment as gospel. That being the case, you carry a great deal
of responsibility with every keystroke that you type. Wield it wisely.
Take care,
VisioN
oldmolly - 26 Nov 2003 15:22 GMT
> Well golly gee, read on please....
>
[quoted text clipped - 87 lines]
>
> VisioN