Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: "Christina Websell" <tina@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 22:59:48 -0000
" Jill" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7lik6pF3b36rjU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FarmI wrote:
Yet as a bachelor pack they seem to have largely reached
accommodation with one > another while choosing (all except that
one, I wonder where he went?) to stick together, rather like the
young males of other social animals.
And indeed some adult male animals. Bulls in a bull paddock for
instance - away from the cows, there is no drama - so different to 2
bulls in with the cows.
We have had peaceful bachelor flocks of birds, for quite a number of
years, as well as sheep, and, in the past, male goats very happily living
together.
Mind you we also have multiple cockerels in with our girls, living at
peace, but then we have positively selected for good behaviour, and no
aggression towards humans, so the genetic pool is not as aggressive as
many.
Chickens have been domestic for so many thousands of years now that direct
comparisons to any wild state is not really useful for creating good
husbandry.
But certainly many of the ancient reports of birds living with native
populations suggest ground forest dwelling animals, who may use trees but
are not dependant on them and often found in more shrubby growth and lower
branches.
Now chickens in much of the world are far removed from these, especially
metabolically. Man has developed the birds so mcuh and their nutritional
needs, and systems, have been altered to be more efficient and eat very
different feeds to those in the wild. The more productive the bird, the
more intensive the breeding has been, and that is in close alignment with
the feed producers. What a low productive breed can use and survive on is
very different to that of the high productive ones. ~High energy feeds,
high fats, are a serious issue - hence why wild bird seed is such a BAD
thing for chickens. Fatty liver syndrome, for instance, is slow to develop
and, often completely missed by keepers until death. But its caused by
poor feeding.
Modern chickens can be easily starved by poor feeding, particularly
layers. They may be taking in calories but if they are not getting the
required nutritional spread then they will have to deplete their own
bodies reserves.
OK, this is my personal opinion on this. I would certainly not be happy if
someone dumped a load of roosters on me. What I wouldn't do is watch them
die one by one and post about it and that is what makes me sick about Ron's
posts.
Chickens are domestic animals, they cannot survive in the wild. If you get
roosters dumped, it's a moral responsibility to find a way to get them
rehomed. If not, you have to kill them.
It is totally out of order to watch them dying in the wild without rescuing
them.
Tina
.
- References:
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: A _L_ P
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: Jill
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: A _L_ P
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: Christina Websell
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: 0tterbot
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: A _L_ P
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- From: Jill
- Re: Last of the Roosters
- Prev by Date: Immigration Reform For Illegals? Where can we find the "legal" immigrants? (Updated)
- Next by Date: Re: Last of the Roosters
- Previous by thread: Re: Last of the Roosters
- Next by thread: Re: Last of the Roosters
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|