I moved my thoughts from the other thread of Ginich's to here, so as not to "hijack" her thread. Mods, please move whatever else should be moved from her thread to here, if ya don't mind - thanks.


Joel in blue (both moved words and new ones that followed).

"I know a few people who would provide some great homes for some of those birds and who would donate to your Rescue also - however, they (like myself) would not allow such involved probing into our private lives, thus we would not be willing to fill out such contracts as you require to be filled out. I know your rescue means well (for the birds), as do many other rescues but these type applications are too involved IMO.

I think too much prying into people's personal lives is one of the main reasons birds are "over-flowing" at rescues & sanctuaries. JMO.

Good luck though in your quest".

Originally Posted by Ginich
"...... If you had to rehome your favorite fids because of a terminal illness or early dementia or something that prevented you from doing it yourself, wouldn't you want a responsible group to oversee the adoption? ...."

Since you asked: If something happened to me or was going to happen to me, like a terminal illness etc., I personally would be more than happy for any and all of my flock members (not just my "favorites") to be distributed to/amongst certain members of this Board (if I had no responsible family member or responsible S.O. at the time who wanted to take on that responsibility). I would want my flock members to go to those who: did not clip, provided a large roomy flights for my birds (preferably outside if possible - if inside, with proper lighting etc.), who did not smoke in the home, who did not have cats and dogs in the house while birds were loose, who did not have lil children loose who may be not as careful as needed, who provided same species playmates for each of my birds that didn't already have a flightmate/playmate (which is only a few at the moment btw). I would want them to go to members who showed they had the intelligence to care for a bird and the heart to do what was needed for a bird in case of illness, etc. etc..... I would also trust these same members if they said that they knew of people who would give my birds excellent homes. I would not require certain Board members here or the people they referred to me to fill out these applications and I would not insist on going to their homes etc....

Couple questions for you now: Do you re-home any of your rescue birds to keepers who clip or to keepers who do not provide all the things I mentioned above? Just curious. Would you trust certain members of this Board or other boards that you frequent to give some of your rescue birds excellent homes, without all the paperwork and home visits and other prying into their personal lives - that is really not always necessary IMO.

Beatriz Cazeneuve said: "Rescues have a responsibility toward their wards and the only way to ensure that they go to the right home is to conduct interviews and do home inspections. It's for the safety of the animal. Why would anybody object to that? It's a reasonable requisite and it's done for any kind of adoption, not only birds. It is a fact of life that people lie and it's very easy to lie in a forum where nobody can verify the veracity of your statements. And it is a known fact that hoarders/collectors never open themselves or their homes to scrutiny (I am not calling anybody here a hoarder or a collector or implying, in any way, that anybody's birds don't receive the best of care, I am just pointing out the reasons behind the questions and the inspections) so home inspections do the trick when it comes to them not getting any more animals. And, besides, when it comes to adoption or fostering, sometimes it's not a matter of clipping or space or even knowledge, it could be just a matter of 'matchmaking' -a home could be perfect for one bird but wrong for another.

They are lovely birds and I do hope you find good homes for them".

To which I will say: What does "right" or "good home" mean"? Shouldn't it be the "best" homes? I am hearing that the primary reason some rescues are so invasive into the private lives of potential adopters is because they want what is BEST for the birds or want us to believe that? Do most people KNOW what is best for a parrot? I feel I do.

Other than being free out in the wild (in areas where preservation of animals/birds, the forests, clean water, etc. are strictly enforced and no capturing & exportation is allowed), what is best (IMO) for any parrot is for it to live in a place where it can be as close (as possible) to what it was meant to be = a bird which means fully flighted with as natural & healthy a diet as possible, with proper lighting/direct sunshine, humidity/rain-showers, with playmates of its own species (preferably) and with as much freedom from stress as possible and freedom from danger of any kind. Parrots IMO do NOT really need the kootchie-koo type of human interaction that seems to be the primary focus of Rescues when deciding who the birds are adopted out to? Sure that is desirable if all the other points I made existed/were provided to the birds first. Therefore, each adopter IMO should have a walk in aviary outside (temp. controlled if necessary in cold climates) or they should have a dedicated safe properly lit (etc.) bird room for all of their charges. Do these rescues insist on that?

Ok, I'll stop there for the moment until I hear what anyone has to say about my comments so far.

Please remember everyone, I am just discussing here what I believe is in the best interests of the birds. Not looking for personal attacks or emotional arguments but a frank and intelligent discussion of the issues I have raised here. Thanks.

Note: My primary point of all this discussion is: Yes I do realize that these applications and home visits are usually needed and are best in most cases but I feel that they should not be insisted on in ALL cases before letting a bird go to a great home. I do believe that this does lead to more birds sitting in rescues as many folks will prefer to just go to a bird shop or a breeder and just pay for a bird with no strings attached. I think many people do not want to go through having their "worthiness" as an adopter judged. Why does someone with years of bird experience with multiple species still be required to complete bird ownership classes at some rescues as I hear is the case? This is also a turn-off. I don't know what the answer is but just wish there was a way that more of these birds in rescues could be adopted out. I understand why the hurdles are put there - to protect the birds but I am frustrated that those same hurdles get in the way of more of these birds getting into some of the best homes. In other words, I think there are a lot of great homes out there but the homeowners don't wish to give up their privacy or jump through all the hurdles some rescues have in place or strings attached in order to adopt a bird. There should be a way that adoptions can be done that protects the birds, at least to the extent that is truly possible (btw, I wonder how many people "fool" the home inspectors in various ways such as by "fixing up" their home environments before inspection and then just go back to old ways afterwards) and yet gets more of them in loving and qualified homes. I don't pretend to have all the answers, just sure wish we could find them.

"Why are some Rescues "over-flowing" with birds?"
Because there are too many of them out there, too many people giving them up and not enough people adopting them. What other reasons could there possibly be?

"many folks will prefer to just go to a bird shop or a breeder and just pay for a bird with no strings attached."
Yes, you are absolutely right. Most people would much rather get a bird with no strings attached. But then most people don't know how to care for a bird properly and, when they find out (usually the hard way) what it implies, they are not willing or able to do it and those are the ones that give them away. And who are these people? The ones that got them with no strings attached from a breeder or a petstore.

"what is best (IMO) for any parrot is for it to live in a place where it can be as close (as possible) to what it was meant to be = a bird which means fully flighted with as natural & healthy a diet as possible, with proper lighting/direct sunshine, humidity/rain-showers, with playmates of its own species (preferably) and with as much freedom from stress as possible and freedom from danger of any kind."
Again, I think that you are absolutely correct in your description of a great home for birds. But the problem is that most people don't want birds so they can live their own lives in a birdroom, they want the koochie-koo interaction. That is the primary reason why people get parrots, for their ability to love unconditionally and their cuddliness. That precisely is the reason why people are not good for parrots.

"Why does someone with years of bird experience with multiple species still be required to complete bird ownership classes at some rescues as I hear is the case?"
Because having multiple species for years does not necessarily qualify you as knowledgeable or caring or even 'normal'. Hoarders have multiple species for years, too.

Sadly many birds are purchased as a spur of the moment decission,People think of how pretty,and don't think Oh this bird is going to need alot of care.
Many petstores and breeders will SELL a bird to anyone and tell people anything they think they want to hear just to make a sale,That includes telling people Oh this bird is great dosen't take much care they are so lovable etc.. etc...
Then people get home with that pretty bird,and next thing ya know that bird hits maturity,and decides to bite its owner or their kids,next thing you know that pretty bird isn't so pretty anymore and it is taken to a rescue.
I am one of the hardest rescues to adopt from,I have a long application,plus I do a unanounched home visit.I check personal and vet refrences.I also do not adopt to anyone who states on their application I USE TO HAVE ,That phrase pisses me off along with their stupid reasons why they gave up past pets. This year alone I am at over 300 birds coming in,many needing medical care,or many who have been left caged for years.
The number of birds unwanted everywhere is getting very scary,I had a lady come in my shelter the other day and say Oh I didn't realize there was a need for bird rescue's,Hello look around and tell me why I have over 150 birds here right now.
I pray one day all of the rescue's will close their doors,due to there not being a need for us anymore.

This is a gentle reminder to all who choose to participate in this thread to please stick to the ISSUES raised and not personalize the positions taken by any particular member. We thank all in advance who assist us in keeping ParrotChatter a community in which tough issues regarding avian matters are discussed with respect.

I feel I stated my case well and was very clear with my comments regarding at least one of the reasons why there are so many birds languishing in rescues & sanctuaries. Those that specifically replied are all over the place (IMO) with your responses and ya seemed to have missed what I was saying and asking? Many questions of mine weren't even addressed/replied to. I give up on this issue.

Btw, do any of these rescues advertise that they have so many birds to adopt (maybe if they did, they would have a larger pool to screen from & thus could rehome the birds quicker). Until I came on these bird related boards, I had never in my life even heard about bird rescues or sanctuaries that adopted out birds or etc....

Couple questions for you now: Do you re-home any of your rescue birds to keepers who clip or to keepers who do not provide all the things I mentioned above?

I know I have. SImply due to the fact that not everyone has the outdoor aviaries etc. I always gave people a folder with feeding, foods, toy ideas, etc with each bird.

Just curious. Would you trust certain members of this Board or other boards that you frequent to give some of your rescue birds excellent homes, without all the paperwork and home visits and other prying into their personal lives - that is really not always necessary IMO.

There are people on a couple of boards that I am on, that yes I trust completely! I feel that the pictures provided, word of others who have visited these peoples homes etc is enough for me. I have always felt that stipulating 2-3 years or perm ownership by the rescue is a bit much. While I understand a check up later to see how things are going, at some point the rescues need to let go and trust that the new owners will be fine.

Also say years down the road, new owner becomes ill and has a family member who loves the bird and visa versa, yet the rescue has demanded that due to the paperwork signed this bird must be returned to them. I disagree with this, why would you want to rip a bird from the only family it knows. Besides, if every bird must be returned in these types of situations, once again it comes back to overloading the rescues. If a family has passed interviews etc, then they should be trusted to do right by the bird in times of illnesses etc as well.

"I know a few people who would provide some great homes for some of those birds and who would donate to your Rescue also - however, they (like myself) would not allow such involved probing into our private lives, thus we would not be willing to fill out such contracts as you require to be filled out. I know your rescue means well (for the birds), as do many other rescues but these type applications are too involved IMO.

Some people may too feel offended by the idea of having a rescue dig into their personal life. I personally may feel a little like my privacy has been violated, but at the same time, its to ensure that the rescue find the RIGHT/BEST home for them. Finding the PERFECT home for them may not be a possiblity. And, some people may have a different perspective of what a perfect home for a bird might be, therefore adding to the amount of birds in the rescue and causing them to be even more overcrowded.

I think too much prying into people's personal lives is one of the main reasons birds are "over-flowing" at rescues & sanctuaries. JMO.

This may be true, like I said. However, what would be better, finding the best home for the bird or just making sure the bird has a home?



Originally Posted by Ginich
"...... If you had to rehome your favorite fids because of a terminal illness or early dementia or something that prevented you from doing it yourself, wouldn't you want a responsible group to oversee the adoption? ...."

Excellent point. When I was a prospective adopter of Lucy and Echo, I had to give out some personal information and though I felt a littlw weird, I felt as though this was the only way to make sure that they birds went to the best home, which may or may not have been me. If it wasn't, I might have ended up with a bird that wasn't a very good fit, therefore adding to the pain and stress of the bird whereas a knowing a little more about the person may have given the owner [rescue] the knowledge to place the bird into more capable hands.


Couple questions for you now: Do you re-home any of your rescue birds to keepers who clip or to keepers who do not provide all the things I mentioned above? Just curious. Would you trust certain members of this Board or other boards that you frequent to give some of your rescue birds excellent homes, without all the paperwork and home visits and other prying into their personal lives - that is really not always necessary IMO.[/color]

Is clipping really so bad when it could provide safety for the bird? Or if the brid went into a home where there were children- but they were respectful and caring? I think some of these things may exclude some very capable people...JMO...


To which I will say: What does "right" or "good home" mean"? Shouldn't it be the "best" homes? I am hearing that the primary reason some rescues are so invasive into the private lives of potential adopters is because they want what is BEST for the birds or want us to believe that? Do most people KNOW what is best for a parrot? I feel I do.

Like I said, some people have different perspecitves on the 'right' or 'best' home for them. From what I have seen in rescues, it is usually a couple people involved in adopting out the birds and therefore are able to narrow it down and and use their ideas as to the right home to find them.

Other than being free out in the wild (in areas where preservation of animals/birds, the forests, clean water, etc. are strictly enforced and no capturing & exportation is allowed), what is best (IMO) for any parrot is for it to live in a place where it can be as close (as possible) to what it was meant to be = a bird which means fully flighted with as natural & healthy a diet as possible, with proper lighting/direct sunshine, humidity/rain-showers, with playmates of its own species (preferably) and with as much freedom from stress as possible and freedom from danger of any kind. Parrots IMO do NOT really need the kootchie-koo type of human interaction that seems to be the primary focus of Rescues when deciding who the birds are adopted out to? Sure that is desirable if all the other points I made existed/were provided to the birds first. Therefore, each adopter IMO should have a walk in aviary outside (temp. controlled if necessary in cold climates) or they should have a dedicated safe properly lit (etc.) bird room for all of their charges. Do these rescues insist on that?


But what about those people that cannot afford to have one? Or those that do not have the means for one? I do not see why they can't have a bird froma rescue. Yes, rescues will ask the personal questions mainly to find out if you have the right 'personality' for owning that bird. If they aksed 'are you married?' because the bird didn't like a specific gender, then I can't see what's so bad about that question. Please explain...


Note: My primary point of all this discussion is: Yes I do realize that these applications and home visits are usually needed and are best in most cases but I feel that they should not be insisted on in ALL cases before letting a bird go to a great home. I do believe that this does lead to more birds sitting in rescues as many folks will prefer to just go to a bird shop or a breeder and just pay for a bird with no strings attached. I think many people do not want to go through having their "worthiness" as an adopter judged. Why does someone with years of bird experience with multiple species still be required to complete bird ownership classes at some rescues as I hear is the case? This is also a turn-off. I don't know what the answer is but just wish there was a way that more of these birds in rescues could be adopted out. I understand why the hurdles are put there - to protect the birds but I am frustrated that those same hurdles get in the way of more of these birds getting into some of the best homes. In other words, I think there are a lot of great homes out there but the homeowners don't wish to give up their privacy or jump through all the hurdles some rescues have in place or strings attached in order to adopt a bird. There should be a way that adoptions can be done that protects the birds, at least to the extent that is truly possible (btw, I wonder how many people "fool" the home inspectors in various ways such as by "fixing up" their home environments before inspection and then just go back to old ways afterwards) and yet gets more of them in loving and qualified homes. I don't pretend to have all the answers, just sure wish we could find them. [/quote]

If I were a person dedicated to getting a bird, I would think that I should do everything in my power to get the bird. If this means having someone in my home, then why not? I don't want to offend anyone, but I think that it would show a lot of commitment for a bird to allow a rescue to come into my home and it would help them to decide of it was a right place for the bird to live. If I am not reading this correctly, please help me understand

__________________
Dominique

Lucy (8)
Echo (2)
Harley (2)
Not Pictured:
Chipper (3) & Solo (2)- Lovebirds

I guess that sometimes the hoops a person needs to jump through and buy a bird from a rescue is just too much. Some rescues seem to be hoarders themselves making rehoming difficult. I believe education is the key. We have no need of rescues here as birds are relatively expensive so purchase is mostly carefully considered. So far it is the breeders that are taking in the unwanted birds. We do have one free flight rescue Birds of Eden the largest free flight bird aviary in the world, Plettenberg Bay Garden Route Adventures South Africa maybe the worlds largest free flight aviary.

I can fully understand the need to screen people carefully though I do believe some rescues take this too far. I also don't agree with the "you must return the bird to us" theory should something happen to the owner, what if other family members are also bonded to the bird? Why should they not be allowed to keep the beloved bird and have to return it to the rescue, that part makes no sense to me at all if the rescues do indeed have the bird's best interests in mind.
My other question would be, most rescues require a home visit which means they will be entering your home and your bird room or your bird area. While I understand why this is needed, what protects the person looking to adopt from the potential disease risk that could be brought in on the rescue person's clothing, shoes, etc? Rescue people have so much exposure to many birds but I can't imagine that every rescue tests for all of the known diseases before doing home visits? People are careful going to pet shops and bird marts and disinfect everything, change clothes, etc because they have exposure to strange birds at those places, what about protecting your existing birds from the possible risk of having a rescue person enter your home and or bird area?