Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: WOBBLY BOB

Anybody can tell you that feeding wild animals at all is detrimental to them. It teaches them to be dependent to the point that their survival skill are impaired and they’re at the mercy of the whim of those who feed them. It’s like welfare.


4 posted on 10/20/2010 12:53:29 PM PDT by Spok (Free Range Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Spok

I used to be friends with a veterinarian and we were in his boat and I wanted to feed the ducks and he absolutely forbid it saying it was the worst thing I could do!


11 posted on 10/20/2010 12:57:22 PM PDT by Boardwalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Spok
These are ducks. In ponds. In England. People feed them bread.

If people didn't feed the ducks bread they'd leave the ponds in England and fly off somewhere else.

These animals are not easily distracted from the mission of eating everything they love to eat. They have no identity crises, nor do they become dependent ~ unless there are some Muscovy or Peking ducks around, and then they'll stick around just to listen to the quacks.

I used to raise ducks as a child and can speak duck well enough to get them to come down out of the sky and check me out.

13 posted on 10/20/2010 12:57:33 PM PDT by muawiyah ("GIT OUT THE WAY" The Republicans are coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Spok

All animals have the potential to be welfare queens. My backyard birds hang out all day waiting for me to give them their seed and my cat is currently sleeping in my bed - waiting for her evening meal.


18 posted on 10/20/2010 1:02:00 PM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Spok

Animals that were formerly self-sufficient are now showing signs of belonging to the Democratic Party … as they have apparently learned to just sit and wait for the government to step in and provide for their care and sustenance. This photo is of a Democrat bear in Montana nicknamed, Bearack Obearma.

24 posted on 10/20/2010 1:05:25 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Spok

“Anybody can tell you that feeding wild animals at all is detrimental to them. It teaches them to be dependent to the point that their survival skill are impaired and they’re at the mercy of the whim of those who feed them. It’s like welfare.”

I thought that was called “symbiosis.”


26 posted on 10/20/2010 1:10:45 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Spok

“Anybody can tell you.....”

Now you got me curious. While it does seem like feeding wild animals could be bad in that it would lure them into close contact with humans, I find it hard to believe it would actually impare their survival skills. I can’t imagine seeing a flock of ducks just sitting around on a pond, slowly starving to death, because someone quit feeding them. In fact, couldn’t it be argued that the extra feed could make them stronger and thus lay more eggs, raise more ducklings, etc.? I personally don’t have strong feelings on the issue one way or the other. It just strikes me as a little extreme to think wild animals are so helpless.


40 posted on 10/20/2010 1:52:51 PM PDT by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson