Treated Lumber for Birdhouses -- REALLY!!!

[Indyrose]

Com'on guys!

I asked a REAL question, and only got a handful of REAL answers (thank you, to *those* guys!)

My own Hubby was one of the major offenders!

Anyway, I got the 4-Her to switch to pine.

Concensus was to not use treated lumber -- I didn't think it was a good idea, but I didn't want to sound like an environmental nut, either. I wanted to get some facts and experienced opinions to help me out...

...And you blew the thread way out of line!

And speaking of poisons, I think most of you are suffering from testosterone poisoning.

Indyrose

[Tom]

Indyrose wrote:>And speaking of poisons, I think most of you are suffering from

It's makin' me go bald. Tom

Someday, it'll all be over....

[BillNorris]

What bothered me about most of the on topic responses is everyone was talking about danger to the birds. I wouldn't want my child working in a room where treated lumber was being cut and sanded.

Who knows the long term consequences of breathing that stuff in. I won't even burn the stuff outside.

[Bay Area Dave]

a couple of years back, I watched a Home Depot employee cut through an 8x8 PT board INSIDE of the store, around customers. I brought it to the assistant manager's attention and he thought it was no big deal. When pressed, he said that they are supposed to cut the wood ONLY during non business hours. BTW, there was a huge sign over the saw stating that they refuse to cut PT wood! :)

I couldn't get any useful response from government agencies to regulate the cutting of PT wood around the general public. I expected that HD would be cited, once I contacted the correct agency. I called ALL of the agencies I thought would be interested in HD's activities. None would take responsibility; they kept passing the buck.

dave

[e-mail] wrote:

[mttt]

Gott'a admit - who knew that thread would degenerate into a Second Amendment Assault Rifles tirade? Pretty damned impressive - and only on the wreck...

[Bay Area Dave]

guess you haven't seen A.S.D today?

dave

mttt wrote:

[mel]

We've become a society that labors too much trying to rid our lives of all harmful agents that may threaten our longevity. Mother's milk contains the same arsenic that is in the CCA treated lumber. They just haven't figured out where to put the warning label.

An interesting statistic.....1 out of 1 dies. Pick a disease and live accordingly. So what if you miss a few of the drooling years at the end?

[BillNorris]

I feel sorry for your children. That is if they're still alive.

[m2c1]

Which begs the question... Did your mother have any children that lived, bill?

[Swingman]

In all fairness, there should be two such labels: The first, in braille, in the vicinity of said manufactuing facility, directing you to the second, also in braille, about 18" or so below:

WARNING to all ye who enter here: Studies show that the results of the biological process upon which you are about to enter can result in undue financial hardship for a minnimum of 22 years from the date of each occurence.

Spoken like a man who anticipates a lot of years left.

[mel]

Swingman mistakenly concluded--"Spoken like a man who anticipates a lot of years left."

Actually it was spoken like a man who doesn't believe this is the best it gets.

[Swingman]

Well, good luck then ... sounds like you may need it.

[mel]

Bill needlessly expressed his concern by stating-"I feel sorry for your children. That is if they're still alive."

Your "" indicates to me this was a lighthearted jest and I assure you I've taken it so...... but it has afforded me the opportunity to climb on my favorite soapbox.... Let's play pretend....

Pretend you were capable of removing all harmful agents to your child's longevity. Let's keep it semi-realistic and accept the fact that we are only talking those agents that can be avoided by choice. Let's pretend that they successfully identified every harmful substance known.

What kind of life would that be? Would they live longer but have less to enjoy? Would they really be willing to give up everything necessary? Do we really want to place that sort of limit on their lives?

[BillNorris]

I actually agree with you.

I think you do the best you can within reason. Switching from treated lumber to pine sounds reasonable and in no way interferes in the child's quality of life.

I have to say I was not that great a parent when it came to my child's personal safety. I was an avid hiker and I took these kids on very dangerous hikes and rock climbs. I almost lost my daughter over a cliff at age six. My son in a raging river at age 9, then again at age 12 when he and I got caught in the middle of a huge lake in a canoe with howling wind and 4 foot waves.

When I look back I see a crazy man who shouldn't have been allowed to have kids in his care. The kids look back on those adventures as great times.

[Dick Durbin]

That's funny. It's makin' me hairy everywhere BUT the top of my head....

[Tom]

Dick Durbin wrote:>That's funny. It's makin' me hairy everywhere BUT the top of my head.... I don't find it funny at all! ; ) Tom Someday, it'll all be over....

[J. Clarke]

While that's certainly the real concern, my impression is that the parents had already decided that that risk was overstated. Going after it from a "danger to the bird living in the house" seemed more likely to be fruitful from my viewpoint anyway.

[Robert E. Lewis]

4wiw -- when I built my last purple martin house, I used exterior plywood, painted the outside with latex paint and the interior I brushed with boiled linseed oil. The bird's seem happy with it, but I incorporated an experimental bat house design in the lower part, and have yet to see any bats nesting in it (I didn't have luck with an earlier cedar bat-house, built with plans from Bat Conservation International, either).

[Dave Hinz]

New to Usenet, eh?

[Dave Balderstone]

I put a bathouse up last year and haven't seen any activity either. I suspect that the neighborhood is too closed with mature trees for them and the house isn't either high enough or there are too many trees around.

djb