Forums | MacLife

Selfishness knows no political boundries.

This frustrates me to no end right after I rescued the one that got shot a few weeks ago.


I would love to personally kick the crap out of the person who ordered this.

No, no, the stock MiniThink response is, "they own the property, they're well within their rights."

Birds are disease ridden too.
They posed a public health hazard....an imminent threat, if you will.

No, no, the stock MiniThink response is, "they own the property, they're well within their rights."

I think that's just r_u.

No, it comes up everytime someone complains about a corporation.

But sometimes it's valid. roo's the only one who says it about everything.

Here in Chicago the city has actually encourages nesting peregrine falcons on many downtown highrises as they are a natural predator of pigeons-which we have an ample supply of-filthy birds aka rats with wings.

I'd trade these damn seagulls for pigeons any day.

God damn that's a shame

I didn't know Red Tailed Hawks were endangered.
There's plenty all over California.

At any rate, there is an issue some people are missing - hawks can do a LOT of damage to people, hawks living that close to people are more likely to attack because their nest is near people and they become less afraid of people - especially while raising young.

If someone were attacked by the hawks, their would be a lawsuit against the property management for NOT having removed them.

A bird like that nesting so close to lots of people is a danger.
Both to the birds, and to the people.

I put up a tall pole with  a roost so that owls and hawks can watch over one of my gardens.  A hawk used it the first day.

A bird like that nesting so close to lots of people is a danger.
Both to the birds, and to the people.

I've never heard of a hawk attacking a human.

Ever got too close to a nest or a fledgling?

I didn't know Red Tailed Hawks were endangered.
There's plenty all over California.

At any rate, there is an issue some people are missing - hawks can do a LOT of damage to people, hawks living that close to people are more likely to attack because their nest is near people and they become less afraid of people - especially while raising young.

If someone were attacked by the hawks, their would be a lawsuit against the property management for NOT having removed them.

A bird like that nesting so close to lots of people is a danger.
Both to the birds, and to the people.

Palemale lived there for 11 YEARS without attacking anyone. He didn't even pick-off those obnoxious "purse dogs" UWS socialites haul around on shopping trips. Your rationale holds no water.

Palemale lived there for 11 YEARS without attacking anyone. He didn't even pick-off those obnoxious "purse dogs" UWS socialites haul around on shopping trips. Your rationale holds no water.

The longer a wild animal lives with people, the bolder it gets.
And they say he raised young there. The young are also potentially a danger (and themselves in danger).

I'm sorry you don't agree with my rationale.
I like animals and I think it is too bad that we spread into their territory, but wild animals are unpredictable, even after 11 years. Hell, domestic animals can even be unpredictable. A hawk can do a lot of damage, and the hawk (and young) themselves are in danger nesting so close to so many human dwellings.

I've been swooped at by a red-tailed hawk when I unwittingly came too close to a nestling while wandering in a canyon amongst the Ponderosa pine trees.  They pass close enough that the breeze made my neck prickle.  That was on a hunting trip about 20 years back in Nevada.

However I have a very hard time with that argument in a big city, resedit.  The raptor nests are so high up in the towers, there's no way they'll bother pedestrians down at street level.

I agree that red-tails can't possibly be an endangered species.  Perhaps they're just in danger of extirpation in New York, though I wouldn't think so.