It doesn't matter how large a donation you throw at some of these smaller centers, if they don't have the people-power available, the fact is some birds, particularly the "common" ones (by which I assumed you meant exotics), are not going to get the care we wish they could have. [end quote]
I didn't even go so far as to say I was lied to-- though I did wonder-- but you said:
From personal experience of dealing with bird rehabbers (raptors, marine birds), it's much kinder to tell the clients who "rescued" the bird that it simply died rather than burden these kind-hearted but uninformed souls with the decision-making process the rehabbers must go through to weigh which bird gets the benefit of their efforts and which doesn't[end quote]
So, though it *seems* from your first paragraph as if you disagree with something I've said, in fact you do an admirable job of detailing and suppporting my worries.
I wasn't trying to debate with you, just trying to make the point (perhaps clumsily) that for reasons of species status and limited resources, rescue centers and vet clinics have to make choices, and they usually make those choices based on the status of the species brought to them. If it's an "exotic," which in birding parlance means a non-native (which in the US means, for the most, part pigeons, starlings and house sparrows), it's less likely that these three species, for example, will be treated.
Indeed, if the original poster was in any doubt from my post, your post should help him understand that if he's concerned enough to do something about this bird with the broken wing, a shelter is not the best course. And contrary to what you say, nearly any vet who treats pet birds would treat a wild pigeon with a broken wing. Whether he'd do it for *free* is another matter, but then I said that a person would likely have to pay for the treatment for a rescued bird brought to a vet.
I don't know how many vets or rehabbers you've dealt with, but in southern California and even where I am now in a much less populated area, none of them I've worked with will take either of the three exotic species mentioned above. They all want to, being animal lovers, but we shouldn't be surprised when they can't if what we have in our hands is an exotic. I'm not defending or condemning; just stating the reality of the situation we bird lovers and the vets/rehabbers face on a daily basis.
Lest I seem negative overall about shelters, I'm not. I am, of course, glad that they do the work they do. I do understand that they have limited means and make decisions about which birds to save and which to let die (or even to euthanize). Though to I am only an "uninformed but well-meaning soul"-- LOL-- like any adult I actually do understand the meaning of limited resources, and that there aren't enough means in the world to save every injured bird.
That comment of mine you quoted wasn't directed at anyone but at the general public who truly believes they're doing wildlife a favor by "rescuing" them. I suspect this is more true in the marine mammal world than it is in the birding world where more birds than, say, seals are rescued. You'd be dumbfounded at the number of people who see a sea lion or harbor seal pup on the beach and take it home to put in a bathtub thinking their mothers have abandoned them! It's good-hearted ignorance of pinniped behavior that prompts this effort (mothers out of necessity leave pups on beaches for hours to go hunt and will return to nurse). Birds are in a different category, of course, where if you see a featherless chick on the ground, it's pretty obvious something out of the ordinary has occurred and we naturally want to help.
In fact, I can even be told the truth about all of this. Despite your claim to the contrary, if a shelter misleads or even lies to someone who made a substantial effort, and left a sizable donation, to save a particular bird, the shelter is thinking of *itself* and not the person in question.
So by the same reasoning, if "your" bird dies, would you want your "sizable donation" back? If I make a blood donation for my friend who's having surgery, that doesn't mean that pint of blood goes to that particular person. It means it's going into the blood bank to replace whatever blood my friend has used or will use.
Again, I'm not trying to defend or condemn a vet's or rehabber's practice, but it seems to me that it's kinder to simply tell someone that the bird died rather than burdening them with the rationale behind *not* being able (or deciding not) to save the bird. Maybe you personally want all the gory details of what the vet or rehabber did to save "your" bird. Most people don't. Give the professionals some credit *and* the benefit of the doubt. If you find a practice that you think is ripping you off, do something about it. But to imply that something nefarious is going on just because you suspect it is doesn't make it so and it most certainly doesn't apply to every other similar facility.
The shelter volunteer just doesn't want to have to explain why she's not going to do much to help this bird, expectations to the contrary, and probably doesn't want to see any donation go out the window, either.
Well, that cynical view is certainly your prerogative.
Shelters do a lot of good, and the people there spend more time helping injured birds than I do, to be sure. Don't think that I'm overlooking that in anything I say above. But dishonesty is not called for, and certainly it can't be justified for *my* own good!
Again, this is a cynical perspective to assume that what the shelter may be telling you "for your own good" isn't anything other than what they do because the general public for the most part doesn't want the gory details. I'm not being simplistic here. Medical personnel who treat animals know that most folks just want to know that the patient is doing well or not doing well. You are obviously the exception that proves the rule.
I'll also reiterate that if anyone wants to make sure an individual non-exotic, non-threatened wild bird is actually treated, taking the bird to a vet is the best thing to do. A shelter is best reserved for those cases of unusual birds, or cases in which a person just doesn't want to pay for a bird's treatment but would like the bird to have some, small chance for survival anyway.
Again, you're using terms that make no sense to describe birds. What is a "non-exotic, non-threatened wild bird" in the US (since this whole thread started with a US-based rescue)? ALL birds except exotics are federally protected, and some under the ESA have additional status designations such as "endangered", "threatened", etc.. And what the heck is an "unusual bird"?
What statistics can you cite that say a vet is categorically better than a "shelter" for dealing with rescued birds? And how does that extrapolate to apply to areas that are too small to support vet clinics or pet hospitals but have a shelter/rehabber/rescue person/facility available?
As I said, though, when I come across an injured wild bird again, I'm bringing him to the vet, not to a shelter.
And again, your prerogative. I just wish you wouldn't wholesale condemn an entire strata of bird care in this country based on what you suspect might have been an obfuscation to allegedly cover up a possible misuse of your financial generosity.