Terrible advice! So mad!

[Laurasea]

"Low maintenance" and Lincoln isn't even that destructive!! This is a day's worth of mess... not even. More like a few hours.

So funny Owlet! Like the confetti at New year's! Only every day! While I was writing this two birds pooped on me, I'm not even kidding! One of whom "Ta-dah" just escaped bfrom her cage to fly over and poop on me, I haven't figured out how she is doing it yet! It's madness!

 

[Jottlebot]

It's like something copied and pasted from about the 1940's with a few facts thrown in. I'm surprised it doesn't suggest "get a pretty pet for that pretty little lady in your life".

How does it follow for an intelligent creature to then be kept in a small space!? No mention of providing ongoing stimulation. Effectively we're being told it's fine to ignore them for most of the day too.

Not even a mention of the complete lifestyle change needed from the humans in the house to ensure they don't accidently kill their pet by doing something as everyday as putting on deodorant near them. Can't think of one thing I had to change when I got my dogs or cats to stop them suffocating to death in a few minutes... apart from not putting them in a sealed bin bag I suppose...

This is heartbreaking. I'm going to get in touch with them and ask them to remove it or amend it too.

HOWEVER.... We could offer to educate the author.... I am sure there are a few of us who would be happy for them the gain some first hand experience in " placing" our beloved feathered fids back into their cages before work..... Mwah ha haaaa!!!

 

[ChristaNL]

I like the way your mind works!

 

[EllenD]

I just had the time to finally read this "article" that you posted Noodles, and that's just terrible...See this is the problem with the internet. It's fine if people want to write "Editorials", or "opinionated" articles online, but this was written as if it's supposed to be a factual, informative article, and it's full on inaccuracies that will actually serve to put birds in harms-way, and stick people who don't know any better with birds they neither want or can handle or care-for...

I'd bet everything I own that the person who wrote this "article" had never owned or even interacted with a bird in their life....

Really it's not the author of this article that should be blamed, but rather the Editor who allowed it to be published on their website...Editors are supposed to fact-check all "informative" and "educational" articles for accuracy and back-up what is said with footnotes and citations...None of those here...why? Because it's an opinionated article, and I'm sure if this website writes anyone back that's what they are going tell you, that "This article was not intended for educational purposes, but it's rather an opinionated article written from the view-point of one of our writers, and that's evident in the lack of any footnotes or citations", or something to that effect...So bad.

 

[noodles123]

I just had the time to finally read this "article" that you posted Noodles, and that's just terrible...See this is the problem with the internet. It's fine if people want to write "Editorials", or "opinionated" articles online, but this was written as if it's supposed to be a factual, informative article, and it's full on inaccuracies that will actually serve to put birds in harms-way, and stick people who don't know any better with birds they neither want or can handle or care-for...

I'd bet everything I own that the person who wrote this "article" had never owned or even interacted with a bird in their life....

Really it's not the author of this article that should be blamed, but rather the Editor who allowed it to be published on their website...Editors are supposed to fact-check all "informative" and "educational" articles for accuracy and back-up what is said with footnotes and citations...None of those here...why? Because it's an opinionated article, and I'm sure if this website writes anyone back that's what they are going tell you, that "This article was not intended for educational purposes, but it's rather an opinionated article written from the view-point of one of our writers, and that's evident in the lack of any footnotes or citations", or something to that effect...So bad.

It gets worse--- another user clicked her name and she claims to have worked with birds and been a vet-tech etc for many years LOL! It enrages me...With opinions like this, her credentials are either a lie, or she must have worked in some sort of terrible bird-mill! From a commonsense perspective, her claims are ludicrous, but even more so having owned birds!

 

[Jottlebot]

I've just sent the below email. I'll let you know if I get a response, but I imagine I won't as they probably gets thousands a day.
.....

Dear The Spruce,

I'm a big fan of your website and I have enjoyed reading a lot of the articles and then being lead into something else by the suggestions at the end of the screen.

However, I read an article today that I have some serious concerns over. It is called "Why Birds Make Perfect Pets". As the article says, birds are very clever creatures and even the smallest species are fairly long-lived. The suggestion though, that they take less care in terms of time and attention than animals such as cats and dogs is utterly incorrect. Also stating that they thrive in small spaces is very worrying. A small bird can live in a small cage, but they must have daily, safe out-of-cage time for a number of hours and have a lot of toys in their cages to keep them occupied, which they will quickly destroy and need replacing.

There are also risks in homes that will kill a pet bird in minutes, these include anything that holds a fragrance and includes deodorants, perfume, scented candles and air fresheners and almost all cleaning products.

I believe this is an irresponsible article that does not reflect the reality of bird ownership and will only serve to encourage people with limited time and finances to get birds that they are unable and unprepared to look after. Animals will suffer as a result and people will be heartbroken when their beautiful pets start to scream none stop, start to mutilate themselves, turn vicious or die far too early.

Birds can make wonderful pets, but people need to know the reality so they can enter into the decision with the best chance of making it a success.

I was surprised to read that the author has considerable experience with birds, but this may be the issue, as the basics of bird ownership may be second nature to her and so have not been mentioned. As this article is written for people who may not previously have considered buying a bird though, I think it is a dangerous omission and makes it sound like bird ownership is extremely easy, which it certainly is not.

If it is possible would you either remove or amend the article to more closely resemble the reality of the things to consider when thinking of bringing a bird into a human home?

Many thanks for taking the time to read this email.

All the best.

 

[noodles123]

I've just sent the below email. I'll let you know if I get a response, but I imagine I won't as they probably gets thousands a day.
.....

Dear The Spruce,

I'm a big fan of your website and I have enjoyed reading a lot of the articles and then being lead into something else by the suggestions at the end of the screen.

However, I read an article today that I have some serious concerns over. It is called "Why Birds Make Perfect Pets". As the article says, birds are very clever creatures and even the smallest species are fairly long-lived. The suggestion though, that they take less care in terms of time and attention than animals such as cats and dogs is utterly incorrect. Also stating that they thrive in small spaces is very worrying. A small bird can live in a small cage, but they must have daily, safe out-of-cage time for a number of hours and have a lot of toys in their cages to keep them occupied, which they will quickly destroy and need replacing.

There are also risks in homes that will kill a pet bird in minutes, these include anything that holds a fragrance and includes deodorants, perfume, scented candles and air fresheners and almost all cleaning products.

I believe this is an irresponsible article that does not reflect the reality of bird ownership and will only serve to encourage people with limited time and finances to get birds that they are unable and unprepared to look after. Animals will suffer as a result and people will be heartbroken when their beautiful pets start to scream none stop, start to mutilate themselves, turn vicious or die far too early.

Birds can make wonderful pets, but people need to know the reality so they can enter into the decision with the best chance of making it a success.

I was surprised to read that the author has considerable experience with birds, but this may be the issue, as the basics of bird ownership may be second nature to her and so have not been mentioned. As this article is written for people who may not previously have considered buying a bird though, I think it is a dangerous omission and makes it sound like bird ownership is extremely easy, which it certainly is not.

If it is possible would you either remove or amend the article to more closely resemble the reality of the things to consider when thinking of bringing a bird into a human home?

Many thanks for taking the time to read this email.

All the best.

Diplomatic yet effective! Thanks!!!

 

[Jen5200]

Jottlebot - very effective email! I’ll be curious if they respond, and hopeful that they correct the info as you’ve suggested.

 

[EllenD]

I just had the time to finally read this "article" that you posted Noodles, and that's just terrible...See this is the problem with the internet. It's fine if people want to write "Editorials", or "opinionated" articles online, but this was written as if it's supposed to be a factual, informative article, and it's full on inaccuracies that will actually serve to put birds in harms-way, and stick people who don't know any better with birds they neither want or can handle or care-for...

I'd bet everything I own that the person who wrote this "article" had never owned or even interacted with a bird in their life....

Really it's not the author of this article that should be blamed, but rather the Editor who allowed it to be published on their website...Editors are supposed to fact-check all "informative" and "educational" articles for accuracy and back-up what is said with footnotes and citations...None of those here...why? Because it's an opinionated article, and I'm sure if this website writes anyone back that's what they are going tell you, that "This article was not intended for educational purposes, but it's rather an opinionated article written from the view-point of one of our writers, and that's evident in the lack of any footnotes or citations", or something to that effect...So bad.

It gets worse--- another user clicked her name and she claims to have worked with birds and been a vet-tech etc for many years LOL! It enrages me...With opinions like this, her credentials are either a lie, or she must have worked in some sort of terrible bird-mill! From a commonsense perspective, her claims are ludicrous, but even more so having owned birds!

"...worked with birds and been a vet-tech for many years..."

That basically means nothing at all, but it looks nice on-paper I guess...Unfortunately most "Vet Techs" are not CVT's that have gone through any training school, nor do most of them have any type of higher-education at all. I didn't realize this before a few years ago actually, I had always been under the impression that anyone who worked in a Veterinary Office/Hospital as a "Vet Tech" actually had to go to school for it, like a technical school. Actual "Certified Vet Techs" (CVT's) have gone through a 2-year educational/training program and have an Associate's Degree in Veterinary Technology...So I had always thought that ALL Vet Techs working in Veterinary offices/hospitals were CVT's...

Then one day I sold a car to a woman, and when doing her credit application she said she was a "Vet Tech" and had worked at a very reputable and the most expensive Veterinary Office in central PA. And she made a very nice amount of money...We got to talking about my college/grad school education in Animal Health-Science, and I asked her where she went to school (Penn State owns a renowned Technical School in Williamsport, PA called "Penn Tech", or Pennsylvania College of Technology, and they have both a Vet-Tech and actually a Physician's Assistant program, so I thought she had probably gone there)...She said "Oh, I didn't go to college, I just applied for the Vet Tech job because when it was advertised it said that no experience or education was necessary"...Then she educated me, and I verified what she had told me, that most Veterinary Offices and hospitals in the US employ "Vet Techs" and "Certified Vet Techs", they both do the same things exactly, but the CVT's are paid a bit more...that's it. So all you need to get hired as a Vet Tech in the US is a high-school diploma. That's it...now I'm sure that some places insist that all their Vet Techs are CVT's, but according to this woman that's not usually the case...

So I'm going to assume that Ms. Kalhagen, who wrote this little "editorial", has absolutely ZERO medical education or training, and her experience "working with birds" is probably 100% only the time she's worked as a Vet Tech...

And like you said, not only are many statements she makes completely wrong/false/untrue, but they are common-sense! Or at least I thought they were commonsense, it's sad if they're not!!!

I particularly liked her statement about saving money by buying less pellets or seed-mix for your bird by just feeding them veggies and fruit some days, so you can "stretch-out" the pellets or seed-mix and not have to buy it as often...Was I the only one who was horrified by that? That's exactly like saying "Hey, you don't have to feed your dog dogfood or your cat catfood every day, you can skip days feeding them that and instead just feed them some people-food, that way you won't have to buy dogfood or catfood as often!!!

Then there was the statement "While your apartment might be too small for a dog or a cat to live in, and if you don't have a yard at your apartment then you have to walk your dog every day for exercise, so a bird is a great alternative because all they need is a tiny cage that is big enough for them to fit into, and that won't take-up too much space in a small apartment, and you don't have to walk them or give them exercise like you do a dog"...That's me summarizing what she wrote, but it's pretty accurate...Oh, and of course the statement right in the first or second sentence that says "Unlike a dog, when you're at work or any time you're busy, you can just throw your bird in it's cage for as long as you need to"...What the hell is wrong with this woman? If she's actually worked as a Vet Tech for any length of time in an office that treats birds, I would think she's seen plenty of parrots who are pluckers or mutilators...good god..

 

[OutlawedSpirit]

Oh, but keeping birds IS SO MUCH EASIER than a dog or a cat! I mean, it sure cuts down on having to worry about maintaining a social life of any sort.

Even with your own family. Our CAG is so finicky, he won't stay on a play stand unless I am in the same room as him the entire time he is on it, so I can't even socialize with my own FAMILY the hours he is on his stand unless they come into the front room with me, let alone any of these people I hear of called friends.

Plus, I never have to go outside with the birds. In fact, only without them. Like when they are so loud and I need five minutes, please, just five freaking minutes of quiet so I can think...

 

[EllenD]

Lol...

What I found most interesting about this article is that the author actually dedicated a paragraph/sub-heading to how extremely intelligent birds are, stating that "birds can count and actually understand logic and reasoning", yet she says it's okay to just toss them in their cage whenever you're busy, unlike a dog or a cat who need constant attention...??????????

And the Irony here is that this author lacks the ability to "understand logic and reasoning"...I don't know if she can count or not...

 

[ChristaNL]

I particularly liked her statement about saving money by buying less pellets or seed-mix for your bird by just feeding them veggies and fruit some days, so you can "stretch-out" the pellets or seed-mix and not have to buy it as often...Was I the only one who was horrified by that? That's exactly like saying "Hey, you don't have to feed your dog dogfood or your cat catfood every day, you can skip days feeding them that and instead just feed them some people-food, that way you won't have to buy dogfood or catfood as often!!!

Actually ...., according to the last studies I've read: dogs who get fed tablescraps (including potatoes and vegges) live longer and healthier than the ones that are soley on dogfood all their lives.
(Which probably says more about the crappy quality of even premium dogfood?)


But really... every person who manages to not get kicked out of highscool and barely clear the lowest educational hurdle ever... gets to be a vet-tech?
That is *so* scary!
(but indeed explains a lot about the absolute lack of anything remotely resembling common good sense in that article)

 

[Sandy19]

Actually ...., according to the last studies I've read: dogs who get fed tablescraps (including potatoes and vegges) live longer and healthier than the ones that are soley on dogfood all their lives.
(Which probably says more about the crappy quality of even premium dogfood?)

I think there is some truth to that. They still need dry dog food as their main diet, but they should also be fed table scraps in moderation, and if you run out of dog food for a day or so they'll be fine eating a turkey sandwich lol . For one reason is that it helps to prevent bloat which can be fatal in dogs.

It doesn't always have to be healthy scraps either, life is short and they enjoy some pizza or a burger occasionally too. That's how I always fed my dogs and they always maintained a perfect weight. My Newfoundland lived to be 16 years old with no problems other than his back legs gave out. That's a dog whose life expectancy is only 10.

 

[EllenD]

Actually that probably does make sense with-regard to the quality of "premium" dog foods...My grandfather bred and raised Beagles his entire life for hunting small-game, and he fed them nothing but regular old Purina Dog Chow from the beginning of time until he died, and they were gorgeous, happy, healthy Beagles who lived into their mid to late teens and were great hunting dogs with tons of energy...On the other hand, instead of spending $12 for a 20 pound bag of Purina Dog Chow, you can be like a friend of mine who fed her German Shepherd nothing but Blue Buffalo on the advice of her Veterinarian and who spent a small fortune on it (I think it was like $50 for a 14 pound bag), and her dog developed some type of Kidney Disease due to him taking-in too much protein and he died from kidney-failure at the age of 4 after she spent thousands of dollars on Dialysis treatments and medications...And afterwards she found out that this was a common issue with Blue Buffalo dog food (this was in the early 00's, the time when the US was making the transition to HAVING to feed your dogs an expensive brand of "premium" dog food rather than something like Purina and the like, and before there were dozens of "premium" dog food brands available, and Blue Buffalo was thought to be the best thing since sliced bread)...

I feed my dogs "4Health" dog food, which is Tractor Supply's brand, on the advice of my dog Veterinarian, who is also a reputable and well-known breeder of Weimeraners...My Shar-Pei gets the "grain-free" varieties because of his skin and ear issues, and my Cattle Dog eats the regular Salmon and White-Fish Varieties, and they love it. My Shar-Pei's skin issues have almost completely cleared-up, versus the unbelievably expensive Merrick dog food I was feeding him...So it definitely is true that when it comes to dog food, "more expensive" does not at all mean "better"...