Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zeus!amadeus!bryanh
From: bryanh@amadeus.TEK.COM (Bryan Hilterbrand;1893;92-789;LP=A;60aC)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: rec.wildlife or rec.econet=-ecology
Message-ID: <2785@zeus.TEK.COM>
Date: Thu, 3-Dec-87 14:28:53 EST
Article-I.D.: zeus.2785
Posted: Thu Dec  3 14:28:53 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Dec-87 05:49:07 EST
References: <2039@dasys1.UUCP> <18737@bbn.COM> <154@bacchus.DEC.COM> <2744@zeus.TEK.COM> <395@picuxa.UUCP>
Sender: news@zeus.TEK.COM
Reply-To: bryanh@amadeus.UUCP (Bryan Hilterbrand)
Followup-To: rec.birds
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 51

In article <395@picuxa.UUCP> gp@picuxa.UUCP (Greg Pasquariello X1190) writes:
>
>> or post articles about breeding/caring for domestic (but not pet) birds.
>                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>What the heck is the difference?  

I think of a pet bird as a bird that isn't afraid when humans are near
to it, and a pet bird is usually trained to talk or get on a person's
hand (shoulder, etc.).  A domestic (a better term would be captive) bird
is a bird that is, for all practical purposes, wild but is kept in a cage.
Generally captive birds don't talk and will bite a person's hand when
the person tries to pick them up, and they are usually afraid to have
humans anywhere near them.  The term 'domestic' was a poor word choice
on my part, because a 'domestic bird' would be something like a chicken
or turkey (however, chicken and turkey (living--not food) articles also
don't have a place to roost--pardon the pun).

>				   Personally, I favor the though that this
>newsgroup is for *wild* birds (maybe rec.birders).  It doesn't get enough
>traffic though.  So maybe rec.wildlife is the answer.

I'm not the person who misnamed the newsgroup--I just put it in my
newsgroup list.  If the basis for this newsgroup was birdwatching, then
it should have been named rec.birdwtchrs (or rec.birders as you
suggested).  You are correct about the amount of traffic put out by
birdwatchers--it is so minimal that they could not stand alone in a
separate newsgroup.  I am (as I've stated before) very much in favor
of a new newsgroup called rec.wildlife or rec.nature, and I would put
both rec.birds and the new newsgroup in my newgroup list (any volunteers
out there to take votes for a new newsgroup??).

>							Those that wish to
>discuss breeding domestic (read pet) birds should probably take it to rec.pet.

Perhaps pet bird articles should be posted to rec.pets (although many of
these articles are asking for advice--and what better place to get
advice about birds than this newgroup), but CAPTIVE bird articles have
no place there (and would probably be flamed).  Also, I'm not going to
waste my time digging through the dog, cat, and goldfish articles to
find the one or two articles a day about birds (NOTE:  I do like all
three of the aforementioned pets--I just don't like to read about them).

>Flame resistant feathers on :-)

No, no flames--just a little discussion.


Bryan Hilterbrand 	   +------------------------------------------------+
bryanh@dadla.TEK.COM	   | Were you REALLY expecting a cute message here? |
Tektronix Logic Analyzers  +------------------------------------------------+