#but this is about harm mitigation and how we can support eachother

[theramseyloft]

What are some of your issues with Palomancy? (You've mentioned not being 100% in agreement with them and I was just wondering)

I’m going to put the answer to this question under a readmore.

Before we go one word further, please keep in mind that Palomacy is currently the largest single network even attempting to advocate for he humane treatment of domestic Pigeons and Ringneck doves.

Palomacy stemmed from the parrot rescue, Mikaboo. 

Their founder did not intend or want to advocate for pigeons, but was compelled by compassion after finding out that pigeons and doves in CA shelters were just being destroyed because no one knew what to do with them, and there was no one even trying to advocate for them.

They are an Animal Rights leaning group, but follow Animal Welfare practices, insisting that birds who cannot fend for themselves be cared for, rather than destroyed.

Palomacy does overwhelmingly more good than harm and makes every effort they know of to mitigate the known risks of potential harm.

What they need, and the birds in their care deserve, is support.

And after all the shit I’ve shared with you guys and I’ve seen and heard and experienced from other breeders, I really can’t blame them for being skeptical of a breeder’s word and research.

There are really only four basic issues I have with them, in order of highest to lowest priority of safety and wellbeing.

1. Insisting that domesticated pigeons and ringneck doves should be fed veggies and fruit.

Domestic Pigeons and Ringneck doves are both strict seed eaters.

They cannot digest leaf, stem, root, tuber, vegetable flesh, or fruit.

Fruit is ESPECIALLY bad because neither domestic pigeons nor ringneck doves can taste or process sugar.

2. Advocating that their adopters house Ringneck Doves in flocks.

Ringneck Doves are not Pigoens, and they do NOT flock.

Pairs are completely solitary and viciously territorial.

They will not willingly tolerate the presence of their own weaned children, and all interaction between doves who are not mates are inherently hostile.

Young doves, not old enough to claim nests or territory, can safely live in temporary groups.

A group of adults only works if the population is too unstable for any one to claim mates or territories: Populations in grow out flights and shelters, for example.

Their permanent homes should be set up to cater to their long term needs, which, for ringneck Doves, are that each pair has their own individual space.

This is what happens when you keep sexually mature Ringnecks in a group:

Those are not markings.

Those birds have ripped the feathers out of eachothers’ flesh during weeks worth of fights.

The ones with bare cheeks are cocks, who have literally be at each others throats.

The ones with bald heads and necks are hens, harassed mercilessly by multiple cocks all trying to drive them at once.

But instead of telling their adopters that it’s best to house doves in pairs, with a single enclosure dedicated to each bonded pair, they advise keeping them in a group and punishing the aggressive individuals with solitary confinement.

When I brought up the fact that dove pairs are solitary and housing each pair in their own individual enclosure is the least stressful set up for them, I was told that doves should all be free, housing them in cages was unnatural, and the doves just had to put up with one more unnatural thing.

They then spammed the thread with all caps chanting that all birds should be free. (Nevermind that Pigeons and Ringneck Doves as they are have never existed in the wild and this is the equivalent of chanting about how dogs should run free at yellowstone.)

Which, to me, is the equivalent of responding to “Hamsters are solitary and cannibalistic. Maaaybe don’t house them in groups.” with “Hamsters should be free, but since the cage is already an unnatural situation, they’ll just have to put up with being forced into objective danger because I can just deter which ever ones lash out by psychologically abusing them to shock them into shut down.”

3. Their refusal to allow anything except local adoptions.

There are lots of people outside of CA that would LOVE a Palomacy pigeon for the rest of its life, but those birds will never have access to any of those homes.

4. Advocating that no domestic dove or pigeon should ever be bred under any circumstance.

Nevermind the insult it is to lump the (admittedly incredibly rare) breeders who actually do care about the welfare and happiness of the animals they bring into the world in with the abusive bastards that should not be legally permitted to own pets, nevermind raising them;

Saying that no animal should ever be bred also implies that no animal should ever have an nonabusive, non-neglectful start in life.

The fact that the world is stuffed to the gills full of breeders who kill two week olds in the nest box and throw them in the garbage for being mismarked is EXACTLY why more ethical, humane, compassionate breeders should be encouraged!

Those disgusting monsters should NOT be allowed to be the majority of breeders! ESPECIALLY not because of the people who would have bred ethically being shamed out of it before they could start!