Quote: In my experience, no. I have experience covering many different genetic lines but none involving purebred fighting stock so if you have game birds I would not vouch for them, as they may be rather like pitbulls, since they are bred to fight, though not necessarily humans. Some will be fine, great even, some may not give any warning before doing what they're bred to do. Note: I don't have a problem with pitbulls, have known some great ones, but have also known some terrible ones, it's not always all the owner's fault either; the breeder stands to wear most of the fault in most cases, the same with human-aggressive animals of any species, as it is often very strongly heritable. I've known dogs of many other breeds including dingo and have not seen any parallels with pitbulls' sometimes explosive changes of mentality, except possibly in chihuahuas... lol.
(I'm not a pitbull hater at all, either. There's plenty of breeds that humans have bred some nasty traits into a percentage of which, but never 100%. There's a psychotic thing cocker spaniels are known for, Rage Syndrome, for example. This explosion of insane aggression is almost always directed at the owner.)
There is always a chance that any animal may engage in violence without appropriate warning first, they're also able to experience mental instability like we are; but generally speaking, the warning signs are there in the vast majority of all cases, but quite often the human's perception of them is lacking.
You need a clear picture of what a truly good rooster is in order to see the most common warning signs of whether or not your roo will attack your kids. And you need to know what his most recent ancestors were like. If any of them were human-aggressive, you're taking a significantly higher risk than if you take a male from a known family-friendly line. Personally I will never again buy from someone who breeds human aggression on.
A good rooster does not come from human-aggressive stock in most cases; that's more uncommon than common. Not unheard of, but I wouldn't bet a kid's safety on it. I will list the traits I cull for, which some will doubtless disagree with, but each to their own, no disrespect is intended.
A safe rooster does not:
>square off to any human, ever
>do the wing-dropped/strutting dance up to humans
>show any sexual attraction to humans
>engage in excessive violence towards any animal other than a true predator
>do more than spar with other males
>abuse females or chicks
>bully others
>give any human 'the beady eye'
>attack someone for holding a chicken
>do that pick-up-and-drop/pretend pecking of things on the ground while watching a human closely
>charge a human
>raise his hackles at a human
There's a few other things but basically every human-aggressive rooster will show some of these signs. One sign most people miss is a rooster slightly angling his shoulders when standing side on to a human, lowering the one closest to the human, as he walks parallel to them, usually with his head low as well though not necessarily facing them. This is a threat display they show other males.
It will help to watch how two roosters warn one another they're about to have a scuffle if neither backs down. Also watch your hens. Their warning system is very similar, but often more subtle, and often more vocal; they will make low pitched noises that can sometimes sound like grumbling or cussing, and it will help you learn what their body language is regarding threats.
Quote: X2. No second chances.
Quote:
X2, that's common sense, the most stupid chickens try to eat eyes. Smart ones don't, just like they don't go around eating one another's eyes. But never assume your birds are smart or stupid until proven otherwise and don't risk a kid's eyes on a theory. Definitely agree that supervision with such young kids is necessary.
Also, toddlers maim and kill chickens pretty often, they are at least as dangerous as they are endangered in the average flock. I'm not sure I'd think a bantam is inherently safer either, though if he's like some Silkies his spurs are wobbly blunt jokes and won't do more than serious deep tissue bruising, not stabbing or cutting. However around here, (may be nothing like your area) bantams are more aggressive than large fowl on average, and often child-aggressive because just like with chihuahuas, they are tolerated because their diminished capacity to do serious harm is considered 'funny' or 'cute'.
Quote:
Yes, many are. It's just like with dogs and cats, and any species we've domesticated. Some are safe, some are not. There's no automatic rule about all intact males being inherently dangerous because most of them have brains which regulate their aggression's outlets and triggers. Some don't. Being stupid is a cullable offense in my flocks and among my animals for that exact reason. Stupid is dangerous, usually, in one way or another, it's rarely a benign affliction.
Also, to be safe, don't buy from anyone who keeps and breeds human aggressive animals, and don't buy from anyone who makes excuses for them like 'it's just because he's an intact male' --- a pseudofact often quoted but totally negated by the many great, trustworthy, intact males in existence. Breeding is one of the biggest factors to consider, more so than raising in many cases. You wouldn't buy a dog from someone known to keep human-maulers, would you?
Quote: I will have to respectfully disagree with the statement made in a previous post about having the toddler handle and hand feed treats to the rooster. There are so very many threads about how "My rooster that I've handled and cuddled since he was a baby suddenly turned mean!" Again, handling them doesn't guarantee that they will get mean. They may have had that tendency anyway.
To be fair, there are also many threads about how "My rooster that I never handled since he was a baby has suddenly turned mean!" I do believe it's a tendency, because it still comes out even when people follow all the uber-respectful advice that's supposed to protect them.
I've handled every single rooster I've ever had, multiple times, regularly in fact, and the only male who ever attacked a human was one bred and partially reared by a woman who kept and bred human aggressive birds. I culled the trait out, never bred any of those exhibiting warning signs on, and never had a problem even though I handled them all a lot.
Handling, or not handling, a naturally human-aggressive rooster won't change him, I believe. With some, chances are it makes them more likely to attack sooner, but I don't rely on fear for respect from the birds, I rely on their sound mental state, and to achieve that I cull unsound ones. If you rely on fear then never handling them would help, but then you still have a higher chance of them all being more aggressive when cornered etc, males and females alike, and you also have a hysterical, terrified and spacky flock you can't handle when necessary.
I've always had little children among the flock and never had any problems, but I do cull for the first warning sign, no second chances. I used to give them three strikes but as a rule, after they had one strike, they always went on to get two more, so I reduced it to one strike and they're on the cull list.
Quote: I don't hand feed ANY roosters, Jr's or adults, I do the hens, but the rooster? Well good animal husbandry goes with that. It's a roosters job to feed his hens. When they forage, it's his job to find the feed. Just something to think about.
I personally used hand-feeding roosters to strengthen the bond. The roos would usually come petition humans for treats to give to the hens. They were never disrespectful to the children.
Taking into account their instincts, I still don't see anything that makes any chicken likely to attack one that feeds it, since that's something I've never seen happen. In the wild, males feed females and chicks, hens feed chicks, there isn't any attacking the hand (or beak) that feeds them; it's not any kind of aggressive gesture to hand feed a rooster, nor do I see how it's bad animal husbandry.
Agree to disagree there, I guess?
Quote: Since he is small and feathered feet, it keeps injuries to a minimum. just my two cents
Yeah, that is something to consider. However he can still cause some nasty injuries.
I've been flogged by a friend's Silkie male, who would ceaselessly hound humans around the yard whenever they were outside the house; his spurs were blunt, wobbled, and surely should have been torn out by the force of his attacks, but it never happened.
He would leave bruising on the bone and could have smashed the bones in the hand of a child if he got a chance, such was the force he used. He was a small Silkie too, not the full size ones. Kids are lower to the ground and he could have accessed a kid's face and done some nasty damage. I wouldn't personally tolerate an aggressive male of any size.
Best wishes.
(I'm not a pitbull hater at all, either. There's plenty of breeds that humans have bred some nasty traits into a percentage of which, but never 100%. There's a psychotic thing cocker spaniels are known for, Rage Syndrome, for example. This explosion of insane aggression is almost always directed at the owner.)
There is always a chance that any animal may engage in violence without appropriate warning first, they're also able to experience mental instability like we are; but generally speaking, the warning signs are there in the vast majority of all cases, but quite often the human's perception of them is lacking.
You need a clear picture of what a truly good rooster is in order to see the most common warning signs of whether or not your roo will attack your kids. And you need to know what his most recent ancestors were like. If any of them were human-aggressive, you're taking a significantly higher risk than if you take a male from a known family-friendly line. Personally I will never again buy from someone who breeds human aggression on.
A good rooster does not come from human-aggressive stock in most cases; that's more uncommon than common. Not unheard of, but I wouldn't bet a kid's safety on it. I will list the traits I cull for, which some will doubtless disagree with, but each to their own, no disrespect is intended.
A safe rooster does not:
>square off to any human, ever
>do the wing-dropped/strutting dance up to humans
>show any sexual attraction to humans
>engage in excessive violence towards any animal other than a true predator
>do more than spar with other males
>abuse females or chicks
>bully others
>give any human 'the beady eye'
>attack someone for holding a chicken
>do that pick-up-and-drop/pretend pecking of things on the ground while watching a human closely
>charge a human
>raise his hackles at a human
There's a few other things but basically every human-aggressive rooster will show some of these signs. One sign most people miss is a rooster slightly angling his shoulders when standing side on to a human, lowering the one closest to the human, as he walks parallel to them, usually with his head low as well though not necessarily facing them. This is a threat display they show other males.
It will help to watch how two roosters warn one another they're about to have a scuffle if neither backs down. Also watch your hens. Their warning system is very similar, but often more subtle, and often more vocal; they will make low pitched noises that can sometimes sound like grumbling or cussing, and it will help you learn what their body language is regarding threats.
Quote: X2. No second chances.
Quote:
X2, that's common sense, the most stupid chickens try to eat eyes. Smart ones don't, just like they don't go around eating one another's eyes. But never assume your birds are smart or stupid until proven otherwise and don't risk a kid's eyes on a theory. Definitely agree that supervision with such young kids is necessary.
Also, toddlers maim and kill chickens pretty often, they are at least as dangerous as they are endangered in the average flock. I'm not sure I'd think a bantam is inherently safer either, though if he's like some Silkies his spurs are wobbly blunt jokes and won't do more than serious deep tissue bruising, not stabbing or cutting. However around here, (may be nothing like your area) bantams are more aggressive than large fowl on average, and often child-aggressive because just like with chihuahuas, they are tolerated because their diminished capacity to do serious harm is considered 'funny' or 'cute'.
Quote:
Yes, many are. It's just like with dogs and cats, and any species we've domesticated. Some are safe, some are not. There's no automatic rule about all intact males being inherently dangerous because most of them have brains which regulate their aggression's outlets and triggers. Some don't. Being stupid is a cullable offense in my flocks and among my animals for that exact reason. Stupid is dangerous, usually, in one way or another, it's rarely a benign affliction.
Also, to be safe, don't buy from anyone who keeps and breeds human aggressive animals, and don't buy from anyone who makes excuses for them like 'it's just because he's an intact male' --- a pseudofact often quoted but totally negated by the many great, trustworthy, intact males in existence. Breeding is one of the biggest factors to consider, more so than raising in many cases. You wouldn't buy a dog from someone known to keep human-maulers, would you?
Quote: I will have to respectfully disagree with the statement made in a previous post about having the toddler handle and hand feed treats to the rooster. There are so very many threads about how "My rooster that I've handled and cuddled since he was a baby suddenly turned mean!" Again, handling them doesn't guarantee that they will get mean. They may have had that tendency anyway.
To be fair, there are also many threads about how "My rooster that I never handled since he was a baby has suddenly turned mean!" I do believe it's a tendency, because it still comes out even when people follow all the uber-respectful advice that's supposed to protect them.
I've handled every single rooster I've ever had, multiple times, regularly in fact, and the only male who ever attacked a human was one bred and partially reared by a woman who kept and bred human aggressive birds. I culled the trait out, never bred any of those exhibiting warning signs on, and never had a problem even though I handled them all a lot.
Handling, or not handling, a naturally human-aggressive rooster won't change him, I believe. With some, chances are it makes them more likely to attack sooner, but I don't rely on fear for respect from the birds, I rely on their sound mental state, and to achieve that I cull unsound ones. If you rely on fear then never handling them would help, but then you still have a higher chance of them all being more aggressive when cornered etc, males and females alike, and you also have a hysterical, terrified and spacky flock you can't handle when necessary.
I've always had little children among the flock and never had any problems, but I do cull for the first warning sign, no second chances. I used to give them three strikes but as a rule, after they had one strike, they always went on to get two more, so I reduced it to one strike and they're on the cull list.
Quote: I don't hand feed ANY roosters, Jr's or adults, I do the hens, but the rooster? Well good animal husbandry goes with that. It's a roosters job to feed his hens. When they forage, it's his job to find the feed. Just something to think about.
I personally used hand-feeding roosters to strengthen the bond. The roos would usually come petition humans for treats to give to the hens. They were never disrespectful to the children.
Taking into account their instincts, I still don't see anything that makes any chicken likely to attack one that feeds it, since that's something I've never seen happen. In the wild, males feed females and chicks, hens feed chicks, there isn't any attacking the hand (or beak) that feeds them; it's not any kind of aggressive gesture to hand feed a rooster, nor do I see how it's bad animal husbandry.
Agree to disagree there, I guess?
Quote: Since he is small and feathered feet, it keeps injuries to a minimum. just my two cents
Yeah, that is something to consider. However he can still cause some nasty injuries.
I've been flogged by a friend's Silkie male, who would ceaselessly hound humans around the yard whenever they were outside the house; his spurs were blunt, wobbled, and surely should have been torn out by the force of his attacks, but it never happened.
He would leave bruising on the bone and could have smashed the bones in the hand of a child if he got a chance, such was the force he used. He was a small Silkie too, not the full size ones. Kids are lower to the ground and he could have accessed a kid's face and done some nasty damage. I wouldn't personally tolerate an aggressive male of any size.
Best wishes.
yay!!!
