What NOT to feed geese? (Food that isnt safe for them?)

Hi. I know this is an old thread but looking at the cute pic of the baby with the pieces of grass, it's ok to give them that long of pieces I'm assuming? I thought it needed to be shorter pieces. Thank you.
 
Hi. I know this is an old thread but looking at the cute pic of the baby with the pieces of grass, it's ok to give them that long of pieces I'm assuming? I thought it needed to be shorter pieces. Thank you.
As long as the gosling has access to grit (like building sand), the long strands shouldn't be a problem. But it will no doubt be more enjoyable for the gosling to get to pick the grass from a square of sod/turf - like this one:

0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Aww thank you for the reply and the cute video. I do already give them little grass chunks just like this but did wonder if say when we mow the lawn can we get a small scoop of the clippings and put it in a bowl for them? Just wasn't sure if that wasn't too much to gobble down real fast you know? Thank you again!
As long as the gosling has access to grit (like building sand), the long strands shouldn't be a problem. But it will no doubt be more enjoyable for the gosling to get to pick the grass from a square of sod/turf - like this one:
 
Theobromine poisoning is not a allergy. A body can only process so much Theobromine. Once you go over that, it starts to cause a toxic effect. My point is that too much chocolate could kill an elephant...but that is a big "to much". I have never suggested that anyone feed chocolate to anything. I just opined that some milk chocolate will not kill your dog.

Quote:

I'd bet your Dr. would tell you that chocolate isn't good for you either. In fact, chocolate is toxic for people too. Theobromine poisoning can cause occasional serious side effects resulting from the consumption of large quantities, especially in the elderly. In extreme cases, emergency room treatment may be required. Now how many folks are going to stop eating chocolate because it might cause an ER visit?

From a reputable veternarian manuel: A typical 20 kg (44 lb) dog will normally experience intestinal distress after eating less than 240 g (8.5 oz) of dark chocolate, but won't necessarily experience bradycardia or tachyarrhythmia unless it eats at least half a kilogram (1.1 lb) of milk chocolate.

People don't come here for opinions, they come here for HELP. Help from FACTS based on repeated experience of intelligent design. Sharing opinion is more hindrance than help. The one seeking help continues their search until PROOF of fact is displayed. At best, your opinion of your single isolated incident is just an "experiment" still in progress.The search doesnt stop based on a strangers opinion. The fact that your dog hasn't died, doesn't mean it isn't harming your dog, nor does it mean that it will not kill him in the future. Toxicity isn't always fatal, and when it is fatal, it doesn't always take effect immediately. When something isn't fatal immediately it doesn't mean that it should be repeated. Flu is toxic and can be fatal. Should a person continue to expose themselves to it? I survive the flu many times before , but that doesn't mean I should continue to expose myself to it. The next time the flu enters my body, if physical and environmental conditions are optimal, I could die from it. Cancer is toxic. It isn't always fatal. When it is fatal it is never immediate, it takes time to get to the organs and toxify them and make them shut down. That is why people die of cancer, not from cancer itself but from the effects it has on the body. That's what the excess theobromine, caffeine, sugar, and peanut butter is doing to your dog. His kidneys and liver aren't processing/filtering it out properly so it's continuing to build up slowly but surely. It's not quick and immediate, it's slow and painful instead. Here is the link from WebMD (ran & reviewed by doctors of varying degrees and experiences) to show PROOF that even milk chocolate is toxic to dogs.
https://pets.webmd.com/dogs/ss/slideshow-foods-your-dog-should-never-eat
 
People don't come here for opinions, they come here for HELP. Help from FACTS based on repeated experience of intelligent design. Sharing opinion is more hindrance than help. The one seeking help continues their search until PROOF of fact is displayed. At best, your opinion of your single isolated incident is just an "experiment" still in progress.The search doesnt stop based on a strangers opinion. The fact that your dog hasn't died, doesn't mean it isn't harming your dog, nor does it mean that it will not kill him in the future. Toxicity isn't always fatal, and when it is fatal, it doesn't always take effect immediately. When something isn't fatal immediately it doesn't mean that it should be repeated. Flu is toxic and can be fatal. Should a person continue to expose themselves to it? I survive the flu many times before , but that doesn't mean I should continue to expose myself to it. The next time the flu enters my body, if physical and environmental conditions are optimal, I could die from it. Cancer is toxic. It isn't always fatal. When it is fatal it is never immediate, it takes time to get to the organs and toxify them and make them shut down. That is why people die of cancer, not from cancer itself but from the effects it has on the body. That's what the excess theobromine, caffeine, sugar, and peanut butter is doing to your dog. His kidneys and liver aren't processing/filtering it out properly so it's continuing to build up slowly but surely. It's not quick and immediate, it's slow and painful instead. Here is the link from WebMD (ran & reviewed by doctors of varying degrees and experiences) to show PROOF that even milk chocolate is toxic to dogs.
https://pets.webmd.com/dogs/ss/slideshow-foods-your-dog-should-never-eat

This is a great example of the pot calling the kettle black. You simply responded with YOUR opinion. Many folks do come here for opinions. Opinions help folks to decide. I have had many dogs over the last 50 years, all ate chocolate. Most lived long lives. Maybe my dogs were the exception, but that information is a fact, not an opinion. When you limit your decision making process to only the information you agree with, you are impeding your ability to make educated decisions.

Also your example of the Flu is incorrect. When exposed to a virus, your body develops antibodies, which will assist your health if exposed again. The issue with the Flu is that it is a virus and it mutates over time. A person can die from the Flu, but that has nothing to do with repeated exposure to it. The Flu does not build up in your system, you either have it, or you do not. Similarly, eating chocolate for otherwise healthy animals does not harm them unless it is done in excess. When done in excess, even water can be fatal.
 
This is a great example of the pot calling the kettle black. You simply responded with YOUR opinion. Many folks do come here for opinions. Opinions help folks to decide. I have had many dogs over the last 50 years, all ate chocolate. Most lived long lives. Maybe my dogs were the exception, but that information is a fact, not an opinion. When you limit your decision making process to only the information you agree with, you are impeding your ability to make educated decisions.

Also your example of the Flu is incorrect. When exposed to a virus, your body develops antibodies, which will assist your health if exposed again. The issue with the Flu is that it is a virus and it mutates over time. A person can die from the Flu, but that has nothing to do with repeated exposure to it. The Flu does not build up in your system, you either have it, or you do not. Similarly, eating chocolate for otherwise healthy animals does not harm them unless it is done in excess. When done in excess, even water can be fatal.

Would you rather not err on the side of caution and not let your dog get ill or die? I agree it is not necessarily fatal depending on dosage but I could say the same for alcohol or cocaine;I would certainly be keen to limit any intake of chocolate a dog was having.
 
Would you rather not err on the side of caution and not let your dog get ill or die? I agree it is not necessarily fatal depending on dosage but I could say the same for alcohol or cocaine;I would certainly be keen to limit any intake of chocolate a dog was having.
No Sir, I would rather make informed decisions, especially ones based in personal knowledge and experience than to follow the flock with the rest of the sheep.
Because cocaine is illegal, I have never had a dog exposed to it, but my current dog sure does like apple cider and that seems to satisfy any intoxicant desires he has. I have no idea if drug dogs inhale cocaine during their work, but I would imagine it happens at some level. As long as they are not over exposed, I would imagine the same it true for this, controlled exposure is not detrimental.
 
Cancer is toxic. It isn't always fatal. When it is fatal it is never immediate, it takes time to get to the organs and toxify them and make them shut down. That is why people die of cancer, not from cancer itself but from the effects it has on the body. That's what the excess theobromine, caffeine, sugar, and peanut butter is doing to your dog. His kidneys and liver aren't processing/filtering it out properly so it's continuing to build up slowly but surely. It's not quick and immediate, it's slow and painful instead. Here is the link from WebMD (ran & reviewed by doctors of varying degrees and experiences) to show PROOF that even milk chocolate is toxic to dogs.
https://pets.webmd.com/dogs/ss/slideshow-foods-your-dog-should-never-eat[/QUOTE]
Cancer is a mutation of cells, it is not a virus nor is it toxic. Cancer kills because it destroys the body functions by disruting their ability to function. You do not metabolize cancer, it simply consumes your resources or it inhibits normal function such as in a brain tumor.
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom