Found a Duckling

[CayugaJana]

I am probably the odd one out here, but wild animals left in the wild - stranded or lost - are still part of what makes the ecosystem work. If I came upon a lone wild baby animal, no matter how cute, it would still stay in that place when I left. In fact, I wouldn't even touch it. It is a part of life. It is how the animal kingdom works.
I guess if it were some obscure almost extinct creature, I might reconsider. But, that is just my opinion.
Due to the duck being in the OPs care already, they have to tend to it as it would be cruel not to.
However, I think we have scared the OP off.

That was my worries as well.

 

[lomine]

Taking care of an only duckling is unselfish and takes a lot of time. It's out of concern for the duckling that one would keep it.

My opinion is that if one is to keep it and raise it, although illegal, has to be kept with that person for life and never released or allowed to fly away, but could be confiscated if found out by the authorities and end up badly for the duck and it's caretaker.

If the intention is to release it, then it should be taken to a rehabilitator, but until a rehabilitation center is found that will take it, someone has to take care of it.

I think you misunderstood my statement. I stated keeping the duckling to satisfy ones own gratification is selfish. Keeping it simply because one "wants to" is selfish. There's been no mention that a rehab center can't be found or it's way to far to get to. My suspicion is that OP hasn't even looked for one or told the other members of the household about the MBTA. If I'm wrong about that I apologize but right now there is no evidence to the contrary.

Your point about it being a lifetime commitment is one of the problems. What happens when the wild duckling grows past the cute fuzzy stage? What happens when the caregiver gets bored or tired of all the work? What happens when the duckling is never quiet because its stressed and lonely without any other ducks? It's easy to dote on a cute duckling but they don't stay that way for long. Many of us know what happens to those Easter ducklings people get. Even if you find someone actually willing to make the commitment, is it actually the right thing to do? Ultimately, our differing views boil down to differences in morals.

 

[lomine]

I am probably the odd one out here, but wild animals left in the wild - stranded or lost - are still part of what makes the ecosystem work. If I came upon a lone wild baby animal, no matter how cute, it would still stay in that place when I left. In fact, I wouldn't even touch it. It is a part of life. It is how the animal kingdom works.
I guess if it were some obscure almost extinct creature, I might reconsider. But, that is just my opinion.
Due to the duck being in the OPs care already, they have to tend to it as it would be cruel not to.
However, I think we have scared the OP off.

I'm actually in agreement with you. The only exception I would make is if an animal were injured due to a person's actions or negligence.

It's unfortunate that OP doesn't want to stick around. My guess is that some posts were simply not what they wanted to hear. But maybe someone will come upon this post in the future and immediately call a rehab center. Or a few more BYC members will be educated on the legality and pass their knowledge on to others.

 

[JanetMarie]

I am probably the odd one out here, but wild animals left in the wild - stranded or lost - are still part of what makes the ecosystem work. If I came upon a lone wild baby animal, no matter how cute, it would still stay in that place when I left. In fact, I wouldn't even touch it. It is a part of life. It is how the animal kingdom works.
I guess if it were some obscure almost extinct creature, I might reconsider. But, that is just my opinion.
Due to the duck being in the OPs care already, they have to tend to it as it would be cruel not to.
However, I think we have scared the OP off.

I think that is true for most of the time. I read a while ago about a baby sea mammal (I think it was a seal) that the normal course of being a baby was that the mom would go out into the sea then return. Some people were taking them home thinking they were abandoned, and then the baby seals always died afterwards.

 

[Soon2BChixMom]

I think that is true for most of the time. I read a while ago about a baby sea mammal (I think it was a seal) that the normal course of being a baby was that the mom would go out into the sea then return. Some people were taking them home thinking they were abandoned, and then the baby seals always died afterwards.

There was also someone out west a few years ago who decided a baby moose had been abandoned and put it in the back of their vehicle to save it only for it to die later.
People do not understand how it works out in the natural world.

 

[JanetMarie]

I think you misunderstood my statement. I stated keeping the duckling to satisfy ones own gratification is selfish. Keeping it simply because one "wants to" is selfish. There's been no mention that a rehab center can't be found or it's way to far to get to. My suspicion is that OP hasn't even looked for one or told the other members of the household about the MBTA. If I'm wrong about that I apologize but right now there is no evidence to the contrary.

Your point about it being a lifetime commitment is one of the problems. What happens when the wild duckling grows past the cute fuzzy stage? What happens when the caregiver gets bored or tired of all the work? What happens when the duckling is never quiet because its stressed and lonely without any other ducks? It's easy to dote on a cute duckling but they don't stay that way for long. Many of us know what happens to those Easter ducklings people get. Even if you find someone actually willing to make the commitment, is it actually the right thing to do? Ultimately, our differing views boil down to differences in morals.

Exactly! People need to think about the commitment.

I actually see both sides of the story: wanting to take care of the cute abandoned baby, (if actually abandoned), and being in the care of a human is not the way the wild bird/animal is intended to grow up and live. Animals shouldn't be in zoos either IMO.

 

[JanetMarie]

There was also someone out west a few years ago who decided a baby moose had been abandoned and put it in the back of their vehicle to save it only for it to die later.
People do not understand how it works out in the natural world.

That is terrible, and why would someone think they could or would want to take care of a baby moose!?

 

[JanetMarie]

I'm actually in agreement with you. The only exception I would make is if an animal were injured due to a person's actions or negligence.

Yes, that is our responsibility to make it right as much as possible.

 

[JanetMarie]

This conversation isn't what the OP was asking for, so good luck @cachal and little duckling!

 

[lomine]

There was also someone out west a few years ago who decided a baby moose had been abandoned and put it in the back of their vehicle to save it only for it to die later.
People do not understand how it works out in the natural world.

Are you talking about the baby bison that was taken and put in an SUV at Yellowstone or was this a different incident?