Can a familiar use wands?

[phaedrusxy]

So the short end of it is "Yes, familiars can use wands. As long as they can hold it in a hand (or whatever passes for a hand for non-humanoids), point it, speak the command word, and succeed at a DC 20 UMD check."

I think this is the conclusion that most people reached long ago, although I'm sure there are many DMs who just don't want to allow it and still say "No". Often they feel compelled to come up with some logical "rules as written" justification for this, but really... they don't have to.

[muktidata]

Exactly, it doesn't prevent you to use item with your hands. As I said before, claws are weapons naturally attached to limbs (hands and/or feet). You can use them or not to attack and still wield or hold any kind of item if the limb could in the first place.

Still, here we are talking about an avian which as claws on its limbs (feet) whereas you need limbs (hands) to wield a weapon.
Ohh, I see my mistake : a wand is not a weapon.

Well, back from the start. In pathfinder you can read here that "To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for non-humanoid creatures)".
In 3.5 you can read the same.

Now it is up to your interpretation: does feet with claws passes for a hand in the case of an avian? For me it doesn't because of the limbs (feet), but it's not an exact science.

What the hell is wrong with you?