# ''wild'' animals as pets......



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

I have put it here because i wasn't sure where to put it!

What are your views on keeping 'wild' animals as pets??

For example: 

Meerkats
Skunks
Porcupines
Large snakes
Exotic frogs 

etc etc

I am not 100% on any. Some i feel should NOT be kept but some with the right care and the right home and owner could be ok.


----------



## ellie8024 (May 4, 2009)

i am not totally sure on that one but have seen monkeys and skunks advertised on preloved and i dont think they really should be pets but on the other hand domestic cats started out as wild animals


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

There wild animals and thats where they should stay! the only people that want to own these animals are selfish and do not have the animals best intrests at heart! . . . This is one of the things i feel strongest about im 1000% against it.


----------



## gorgeous (Jan 14, 2009)

No they are not pets.

They are wild animals and deserve to live their lives as nature intended.


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

Some I don't mind skunks are pretty domesticated for example and I would love to own one. But a lot no unless you have a very very experienced owner and they're kept as they would be say in a zoo or whatever. But as housepets no and especially not the larger ones I'm still finding it hard to believe people kept lions as house pets.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

I am 100% with you on that, i do not agree with it at all..............however some people class Chameleons/lizards etc as wild animals too?


It is such a difficult subject! 

Monkeys i am 100000% against, our human homes no matter how big...DO NOT have sufficent space for them. Monkeys also need much much more than human and his/her home can ever offer.

But as above some animals could be classed as 'wild' but yet kept as pets in many many homes.


----------



## ashleighhhhh (Jul 8, 2009)

Well for me I don't think Meerkats or Monkeys or Porcupines or Exotic frogs should be kept!!
The snakes I'm not so sure.. depends on how big you mean! And I've seen skunks as pets and they seem alright, as long as their not caged.. They should be kept almost like a house cat 
Just my opinion though!!

PS: If too many people post on here their could be many arguments! I haven't been here too long and I've seen a few big arguments over meerkats already!!


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Nicky09 said:


> Some I don't mind skunks are pretty domesticated for example and I would love to own one. But a lot no unless you have a very very experienced owner and they're kept as they would be say in a zoo or whatever. But as housepets no and especially not the larger ones I'm still finding it hard to believe people kept lions as house pets.


I know people in Africa (got family over there!) who keep lion cubs in their home.......although they are not 'pets' but the lioness has either dies in the wild or disowned them in the nature reserve and the people are bringing the cubs up to a certain age then they start the programme where they learn 'normal' cub life and go on to be released. However, these people know excatly what they doing and have years of experience.

But as pets????? No way.....people should be locked up for that.


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

Thats a different situation where they will be released back into the wild those aren't pets. Seriously people kept them as house pets before they brought in the DWA. Some people do still keep them in massive enclosures but those aren't pets as such and they do know what they're doing


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ashleighhhhh said:


> Well for me I don't think Meerkats or Monkeys or Porcupines or Exotic frogs should be kept!!
> The snakes I'm not so sure.. depends on how big you mean! And I've seen skunks as pets and they seem alright, as long as their not caged.. They should be kept almost like a house cat
> Just my opinion though!!
> 
> PS: If too many people post on here their could be many arguments! I haven't been here too long and I've seen a few big arguments over meerkats already!!


oh yeah those meerkat threads:blushing: (tho there was no arguing that i saw just disagreeing lol)

i dont think wild animals should be kept as pets


----------



## cassie01 (Jul 11, 2008)

as i have said on threads similar to this before, apart from cats and dogs, who domesticated themselves all other species kept as pets today have been domesticated by people removing them from the wild and taming them. some were tamed easier then others. 

I do not agree with taking pets out of the wild to domesticate them and many species are not suited to house hold life such as monkeys, large cats etc. however if i had the space and money i would have my own private zoo in a heartbeat. i would think of these animals as pets because i would love them but i would never dream of expecting them to behave like pets. i would allow them to remain mostly wild. 

people who are completly against keeping any of these animals as pets at all should surely feel the same way about all animals except the cats and dogs??


----------



## ellie8024 (May 4, 2009)

in the north of england where i used to live there was an issue with big cats that had escaped from private homes. me and my bro saw one once and we had to call the council who sent someone out to interview us. turned out it was a black leopard cub but was caught thankfully. I also dont think monkeys should be kept as pets either personally


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

What do people class as ''wild''??

This is where things get confusing.....some people class Skunks as wild yet others don't....it goes for many animals

Some people i know don't agree with keeping Chameleons as pets beacuse they are 'wild'...

Where do we draw the line? Mammals only? Or do we include the amphibian? And Arachnid?


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

I tend to class it as not keeping dangerous animals that can't be easily domesticated so skunks ok but something like a rhino or a gorilla hell no.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

cassie01 said:


> as i have said on threads similar to this before, apart from cats and dogs, who domesticated themselves all other species kept as pets today have been domesticated by people removing them from the wild and taming them. some were tamed easier then others.
> 
> I do not agree with taking pets out of the wild to domesticate them and many species are not suited to house hold life such as monkeys, large cats etc. however if i had the space and money i would have my own private zoo in a heartbeat. i would think of these animals as pets because i would love them but i would never dream of expecting them to behave like pets. i would allow them to remain mostly wild.
> 
> people who are completly against keeping any of these animals as pets at all should surely feel the same way about all animals except the cats and dogs??


One of my friends said this. Cats and dogs are in a different league to other species.

Rabbit, Rats, Hamsters, Gerbils, Snakes etc etc were all taken form the wild and then 'commercialised'

I still do not agree with keeping 'wild' animals as pets. But i would like to know where we draw the line.


----------



## ashleighhhhh (Jul 8, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> oh yeah those meerkat threads:blushing: (tho there was no arguing that i saw just disagreeing lol)
> 
> i dont think wild animals should be kept as pets


yess those meerkat threads!! there have been quite a few! yes I agree not much arguing.. but so much disagreeing that the threads have either been deleted or locked!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> What do people class as ''wild''??
> 
> This is where things get confusing.....some people class Skunks as wild yet others don't....it goes for many animals
> 
> ...


imo anything that isnt domesticated is wild,

i think because many say reptiles have been kept as pets for many years a lot of people find this acceptable, i personally dont like to see them kept as pets, the tanks they are kept in always seem small & inadequate many snakes dont have the space to even stretch out.


----------



## cassie01 (Jul 11, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> One of my friends said this. Cats and dogs are in a different league to other species.
> 
> Rabbit, Rats, Hamsters, Gerbils, Snakes etc etc were all taken form the wild and then 'commercialised'
> 
> I still do not agree with keeping 'wild' animals as pets. But i would like to know where we draw the line.


i would draw the line at animals that didnt evolve to be domesticated on their own. so cats and dogs are about the only ones i would class as not wild.

if you put young pets such as hamsters, rabbits, reptiles, birds etc out in the wild at an early age they would stay away from people and revert back to their original wildness. if you did it to a cat or dog they would still be close to people because they need people to survive. dogs because they are scavengers and would eat the rubbish and cats because we attract rodents and other prey.

rats, squirrels and urban foxes are the next closest thing to proper domestication as they also tame themselves and/or rely on humans to survive.

having said all that for a lot of "pet" species the damage is already done and i keep/have kept many of them myself and will continue to do so because i like them (selfish i know) and mine are 90% of the time rescued. this is why i always try to give my animals the best of everything, lots to do and lots of space.


----------



## JoWDC (Jan 11, 2009)

I don't agree with any wild animal being kept as a pet. I agree with Noushka on the classification of wild, being anything that isn't domesticated.

The worst cases are those people who keep big cats as pets - what were they thinking in the first placeut:ut:


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Some animals adjust quite happily to being kept as pets and with careful breeding for temperament can be bred to be acceptable pets. But other have specific needs where habitat and diet are concerned and indeed may never be trustworthy as 'pettable' in normal homes. Some animals need the company of their own species, large secure enclosures (often more than the average back garden can accomodate) and specific diets and may never be trustworthy to handle. People soon discover just why they are unsuitable as pets and then dump them. It's very sad but then we do live in an 'I want' society and what 'I wants' want, 'I wants' get and then get rid of when they tire of them as with lots of different types of pet.:mad2:

A friend of mine has a young female skunk. She actively seeks him out for cuddles on her terms, rather like a cat does to be honest and has the run of the house whenever he is in. He feeds her the correct balanced diet and she seems to lack for nothing. I cannot say that I was entirely approving when he said he was going to get her but he has and has commited himself to giving her as good a life as possible. When his garden is secured properly and has been done to skunk standards, she will be able to go out there too when the weather is fit. I wouldn't have one and they are certainly not pets for everyone but she is there, he has her and she is a very happy little girl. :001_wub:
(But I still would not have one and I am not that happy that such animals are in the pet trade in the first place!)


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> imo anything that isnt domesticated is wild,
> 
> i think because many say reptiles have been kept as pets for many years a lot of people find this acceptable, i personally dont like to see them kept as pets, the tanks they are kept in always seem small & inadequate many snakes dont have the space to even stretch out.


I agree. Although i want a corn snake. People have told me the measurements and i was horrified. 4ft viv for a 4ft snake  i would rather keep my 4ft snake in a 8ft viv at least 5ft wide and 4 feet high. For example. xx



cassie01 said:


> i would draw the line at animals that didnt evolve to be domesticated on their own. so cats and dogs are about the only ones i would class as not wild.
> 
> if you put young pets such as hamsters, rabbits, reptiles, birds etc out in the wild at an early age they would stay away from people and revert back to their original wildness. if you did it to a cat or dog they would still be close to people because they need people to survive. dogs because they are scavengers and would eat the rubbish and cats because we attract rodents and other prey.
> 
> ...


Again i agree. I don't have a problem with keeping ''normal'' pets so to speak....i.e rats, hammies, smaller snakes etc etc as long as they are kept with more than they would ever require. Like big enclosures,, right nutrition etc

But introducing more 'wild' animals to be sold as 'pets' i do have a problem with.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cassie01 said:


> i would draw the line at animals that didnt evolve to be domesticated on their own. so cats and dogs are about the only ones i would class as not wild.
> 
> if you put young pets such as hamsters, rabbits, reptiles, birds etc out in the wild at an early age they would stay away from people and revert back to their original wildness. if you did it to a cat or dog they would still be close to people because they need people to survive. dogs because they are scavengers and would eat the rubbish and cats because we attract rodents and other prey.
> 
> rats, squirrels and urban foxes are the next closest thing to proper domestication as they also tame themselves and/or rely on humans to survive.


i disagree domestic rabbits & domesticated rodents probably wouldnt survive in the wild theyre coat patterns have been altered they have lost certain inate behaviours needed for survival in the wild.

on the other hand urban foxes etc..although they can learn to trust humans to different degress they will never be truely domesticated, they will retain inate behaviours because they are wild animals & should where ever possible live out their lives in the wild.


----------



## cassie01 (Jul 11, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> I agree. Although i want a corn snake. People have told me the measurements and i was horrified. 4ft viv for a 4ft snake  i would rather keep my 4ft snake in a 8ft viv at least 5ft wide and 4 feet high. For example. xx
> 
> Again i agree. I don't have a problem with keeping ''normal'' pets so to speak....i.e rats, hammies, smaller snakes etc etc as long as they are kept with more than they would ever require. Like big enclosures,, right nutrition etc
> 
> ...


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> I agree. Although i want a corn snake. People have told me the measurements and i was horrified. 4ft viv for a 4ft snake  i would rather keep my 4ft snake in a 8ft viv at least 5ft wide and 4 feet high. For example. xx
> 
> Again i agree. I don't have a problem with keeping ''normal'' pets so to speak....i.e rats, hammies, smaller snakes etc etc as long as they are kept with more than they would ever require. Like big enclosures,, right nutrition etc
> 
> But introducing more 'wild' animals to be sold as 'pets' i do have a problem with.


i know you'd give a corn snake a great life

so do i its so worrying, the trade in exotics is rife with cruelty aswell!


----------



## cassie01 (Jul 11, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i disagree domestic rabbits & domesticated rodents probably wouldnt survive in the wild theyre coat patterns have been altered they have lost certain inate behaviours needed for survival in the wild.
> 
> on the other hand urban foxes etc..although they can learn to trust humans to different degress they will never be truely domesticated, they will retain inate behaviours because they are wild animals & should where ever possible live out their lives in the wild.


i agree to an extent but dogs seperated from wolves in the same manner as the foxes (ie urban and rural), some learned to deal with people and others fled, eventaully i think we will have two distinctly seperate species of fox.

also with the rodents, the first few generations would struggle and survival of the fittest would kick in but after a few years they would soon evolve to become more like their wild relatives, quicker if they breed with wild animals too.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cassie01 said:


> Acacia86 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree. Although i want a corn snake. People have told me the measurements and i was horrified. 4ft viv for a 4ft snake  i would rather keep my 4ft snake in a 8ft viv at least 5ft wide and 4 feet high. For example. xx
> ...


----------



## maddogfan (Dec 19, 2008)

they are some wild animal that can not go back in to the wild because they can not defene themself


----------



## Akai-Chan (Feb 21, 2009)

I will probably get shot down for this but...

i believe that if someone can provide the right sort of environment for the particular animal and can povide for its needs and take responsibility for the animal to meet its requirements eg dietary and things to keep it stimulated then its ok. 

For skunks... These animals have been domesticated for many years and can be kept happily in a household environment. I myself intend to get a skunk or 2 when I own my own house, but each animal is different.

Peace
Akai-Chan


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cassie01 said:


> i agree to an extent but dogs seperated from wolves in the same manner as the foxes (ie urban and rural), some learned to deal with people and others fled, eventaully i think we will have two distinctly seperate species of fox.
> 
> also with the rodents, the first few generations would struggle and survival of the fittest would kick in but after a few years they would soon evolve to become more like their wild relatives, quicker if they breed with wild animals too.


ive copied and pasted some of this of an old post of mine cos im going to bed soon & im too tired to think! lol

domestication of the dog took thousands of years, a domestic animal is one who depends on people, who probably diverged from their wild ancestors thousands of years ago through mans selective breeding of them & so now there is no longer a place for them in the wild.

on the other hand exotics are not domesticated they belong to eco systems & should not be kept in environments which are unnatural to them.

Exotic wild animals, even those bred in captivity, still possess innate social and physical needs, and mental stimulation that cannot be met in private homes. Many animals naturally live in colonies, yet are kept as single pets. Severe boredom replaces normal behaviors like grooming one another, climbing, foraging for food, mating and rearing young that would occupy their time and attention. This boredom can lead to self-destruction,aggression & illness
__________________


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i know you'd give a corn snake a great life
> 
> so do i its so worrying, the trade in exotics is rife with cruelty aswell!


Thanks hun! My pets live better than me sometimes lol!! xx Give huge kisses to Inca for me..........tell her auntie ash loves her! Oh the others gorgeous lot while your there! xxx



maddogfan said:


> they are some wild animal that can not go back in to the wild because they can not defene themself


But some not have been domesticated in the first place.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

I'm not too keen on larger mammals and the likes of Meerkats being kept as pets, however most larger snakes (i.e Reticulated and Burmese pythons) and the majority of frogs are now bred in captivity. Countries such as Brazil have placed strict export restrictions on hundreds of species, and if you ask me it's for the best.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

maddogfan said:


> they are some wild animal that can not go back in to the wild because they can not defene themself


im all for rescuing wildlife, i understand they sometimes cant be released into the wild, but i dont agree with breeding wild animals for the pet trade theres too much suffering involved.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

it depends on weather the animals have been bred in captivity in my opinion i dont agree with wild caught animals been kept as pets. we all have to remember every animal was wild at some point and still is genetically thats how we cant trust them 100%


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

What we say is "normal" wasn't before it was domesticated. Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong.

I am quite sure that a long time ago, there would have been some people who were very sceptical about domesticating dogs. But look how that turned out.

I think when you say the word pet, you think of a household creature, which you have close contact with. But that isn't always the case. I know people who have Komodo Dragons, Tigers and Crocs. Of course, these are housed suitably, in massive private enclosures.
Not only is buying these animals incredibly expensive - thousands and thousands of pounds - you need a DWA (Dangerous Wild Animals) license to keep them. So usually, it's very serious people who are involved with these animals.

Reptiles have been kept as pets for years. Snakes, being cold blooded, spent a lot of their time basking, curled in a ball. Even in the wild, some of the bigger snakes will spent a lot of their time curled up in one place.
Some of the aboreal snakes need branches etc to climb on, but more handable ones don't require much exercise - just like large breed dogs - so keeping them in what some non-reptile people might think is a small vivarium, is actually more than adequate, as long as they are handled on a regular basis.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> Thanks hun! My pets live better than me sometimes lol!! xx Give huge kisses to Inca for me..........tell her auntie ash loves her! Oh the others gorgeous lot while your there! xxx
> 
> But some not have been domesticated in the first place.


lol i certainly will im putting them all to bed soon xxx


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Everyone keeps going on about exotic animals not being looked after properly..... What about dogs and cats????

I know of 2 people who never take their dogs for walks. 

Usually people who get involved with exotics are doing so for the love of the animals. They are expensive, high maintenance pets and apart from a very small minority, are usually kept by responsible people who are passionate about their care and put a lot of time, effort and money into making sure they are happy and healthy animals.

Whereas some people go out and buy dogs, cats, guinea pigs etc maybe because they are readily available and can be cheap, and don't look after them properly.


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

Agree with you on that one Dkdream......I wonder if it isn't the fact that we can't trust them 100% but rather they shouldn't trust us. We see something...think oh thats cute and shove it in a cage. Breed it to death (in some cases) then wonder why it turns on us somewhere down the line. It doesn't matter how often you try to breed some sort of perfection into an animal, you can't breed out its natural instincts.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

MissG said:


> Everyone keeps going on about exotic animals not being looked after properly..... What about dogs and cats????I know of 2 people who never take their dogs for walks.* Usually people who get involved with exotics are doing so for the love of the animals.* They are expensive, high maintenance pets and apart from a very small minority, are usually kept by responsible people who are passionate about their care and put a lot of time, effort and money into making sure they are happy and healthy animals.Whereas some people go out and buy dogs, cats, guinea pigs etc maybe because they are readily available and can be cheap, and don't look after them properly.


i think its people being abit judgemental of the unknown, to some it maynot be common to keep monkeys etc, so they have strong views.* I agree with what you have said.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> What we say is "normal" wasn't before it was domesticated. Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong.
> 
> I am quite sure that a long time ago, there would have been some people who were very sceptical about domesticating dogs. But look how that turned out.
> 
> ...


dog domestication didnt happen overnight it took thousands of years & was mutually beneficial to both species.

i think in most cases keeping exotics is very wrong! you know someone with komodo dragons?? my god theres hardly any in uk zoos nevermind privately owned...who has them?

well i think its cruel, even most zoo's cant keep exotics properly, before people buy these baby monkeys etc they should do a lot of research into the trade in them its vile! better still contact monkey world in Dorset they should put off anyone thinking of buying an exotic for a pet.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

Caring for a dog is NOT the same as caring for an wild animal i dont belive! we know what is best to feed our pets, we know how much excersise they need, we know when there ill we can take them to the vets, we know what to look out for to see if there ill.

Most people CANT offer a wild animal the life it needs! and no matter how big there enclosure is there not free to roam or choose there OWN place to stay! and i think its cruel to bring wild animals up in a way that is not natural..because no matter what you say it no one can EVER give them whats natural to them..

and why would some one want to take a beautiful animals out of the wild and lock it away in an eclosure anyway! I shall tell you! for there own benifit and selfishness.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Caring for a dog is NOT the same as caring for an wild animal i dont belive! we know what is best to feed our pets, we know how much excersise they need, we know when there ill we can take them to the vets, we know what to look out for to see if there ill.
> 
> Most people CANT offer a wild animal the life it needs! and no matter how big there enclosure is there not free to roam or choose there OWN place to stay!


I think it maybe because dogs have been kept alot longer, people have to start from somewhere im not going to say i think its wrong because i have parrots as pets and if i said it was wrong id be a hypocrite.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

yes dogs took thousands and thousands of years to turn domestic! we have plenty of pets out there to choose from why domestic more of our beautiful wildlife? imo its not right and i dont think i will ever think other wise.


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

Akai-Chan said:


> I will probably get shot down for this but...
> 
> i believe that if someone can provide the right sort of environment for the particular animal and can povide for its needs and take responsibility for the animal to meet its requirements eg dietary and things to keep it stimulated then its ok.
> 
> ...


Your going to keep them in your house...good luck with the smell


----------



## Baby Bordie (Jun 21, 2009)

Well IMO It depends how the animal is kept, If it has its proper needs.. But you jump to say that an dog or cat is domestic, well lets say millions of years ago or thousands of years ago, they would have all been wild, so all domestic animals once must have been wild? Correct me if im wrong....


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> yes dogs took thousands and thousands of years to turn domestic! we have plenty of pets out there to choose from why domestic more of our beautiful wildlife?


because dogs and cats arnt for everyone and they might like to have something different to me aslong as the people can offer the animals that have been bred in captivity a good enclosure to the best of there ability (reserced etc) and can afford the expensive vets bills provide the most natural/best diet i dont see a problem. I dont however agree with wild caught animals been kept as pets because they have experienced living in the wild.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

> they are some wild animal that can not go back in to the wild because they can not defene themself


Yes thats true and im all for helping animals that cant be released again! but thats abit different thats life or death..taking in a wild animal just because you can or just because you want to is wrong and there is no need for it.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Everyone keeps going on about exotic animals not being looked after properly..... What about dogs and cats????
> 
> I know of 2 people who never take their dogs for walks.
> 
> ...


of course i dont agree with any neglect,cruelty of any animal whether its a cat or a rat, i think its discusting the way some people treat their domestic pets.

i love them, im passionate about all animals, thats why i would never want a wild one, very few people could give them what they require to keep them happy and i dont think in captivity they are happy.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

gr33neyes said:


> Your going to keep them in your house...good luck with the smell


some people say the smell isnt that bad because of the diets offerd. I cant comment as ive never owned a skunk i think they are beautiful but wont ever have one.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> because dogs and cats arnt for everyone and they might like to have something different to me aslong as the people can offer the animals that have been bred in captivity a good enclosure to the best of there ability (reserced etc) and can afford the expensive vets bills provide the most natural/best diet i dont see a problem. I dont however agree with wild caught animals been kept as pets because they have experienced living in the wild.


Thats exactly it DK..something bigger and better than what anyone else has got!


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Yes thats true and im all for helping animals that cant be released again! but thats abit different thats life or death..taking in a wild animal just because you can or just because you want to is wrong and there is no need for it.


i agree but not many people take exotics from the wild they sometimes are born to wild parents, i dont agree with the parents been caught but the babys in my eyes have started being demestocated as they whernt born in the wild.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Caring for a dog is NOT the same as caring for an wild animal i dont belive! we know what is best to feed our pets, we know how much excersise they need, we know when there ill we can take them to the vets, we know what to look out for to see if there ill.
> 
> Most people CANT offer a wild animal the life it needs! and no matter how big there enclosure is there not free to roam or choose there OWN place to stay! and i think its cruel to bring wild animals up in a way that is not natural..because no matter what you say it no one can EVER give them whats natural to them..
> 
> and why would some one want to take a beautiful animals out of the wild and lock it away in an eclosure anyway! I shall tell you! for there own benifit and selfishness.


well said!


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> some people say the smell isnt that bad because of the diets offerd. I cant comment as ive never owned a skunk i think they are beautiful but wont ever have one.


Yes you're right they are beautiful...even more so in the wild.
I suppose the only way to find out if they smell is to own one, but it is illegal to descent them in this country.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> i agree but not many people take exotics from the wild they sometimes are born to wild parents, i dont agree with the parents been caught but the babys in my eyes have started being demestocated as they whernt born in the wild.


so you would be happy to line the pockets of some one that has breed from an wild animals after catching it. the female would have been stressed out to the max that is wrong imo half domestocated babies or not the mum would have been terrifed around things she didnt know..just so some one could breed and domesticate these animals? naa all wrong.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

gr33neyes said:


> Yes you're right they are beautiful...even more so in the wild.
> I suppose the only way to find out if they smell is to own one, but it is illegal to descent them in this country.


yeah it is, but then again a male cat would smell if left un neuterd and it sprayed and people can deal with that so i suppose if your dedicated and love the animal it wont matter to you.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> i agree but not many people take exotics from the wild they sometimes are born to wild parents, i dont agree with the parents been caught but the babys in my eyes have started being demestocated as they whernt born in the wild.


DK the trade in these exotics is so cruel, take monkeys & meerkats for example...in the wild babies stay with their parents in family groups sometimes for the whole of their lives...bred in captivity they are torn away far too young leaving all the animals in a state of distress, theyres big money to be made tho!


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> DK the trade in these exotics is so cruel, take monkeys & meerkats for example...in the wild babies stay with their parents in family groups sometimes for the whole of their lives...bred in captivity they are torn away far too young leaving all the animals in a state of distress, theyres big money to be made tho!


Thats another good point!  The babies are took of there mum to early so they dont take on the NATURAL instincts...


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> so you would be happy to line the pockets of some one that has breed from an wild animals after catching it. the female would have been stressed out to the max that is wrong imo half domestocated babies or not the mum would have been terrifed around things she didnt know..just so some one could breed and domesticate these animals? naa all wrong.


I didnt say i would i actually said i dont agree with wild caught parents, but sadly it happens what i did say the babies they produce are in my opinion starting demestication so its not as bad on them, they will still act wild but it would be a start, I dont agree with the wild animals been caught and bred from but its happend now and the babys offerd for sale or often tame.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

gr33neyes said:


> Yes you're right they are beautiful...even more so in the wild..


I agree!  theres nothing better than seeing a wild animals out where it belongs leading a normal life, doing as it pleases! Happy little things! shame people think they have the right to take that away from them! :cursing:


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> DK the trade in these exotics is so cruel, take monkeys & meerkats for example...in the wild babies stay with their parents in family groups sometimes for the whole of their lives...bred in captivity they are torn away far too young leaving all the animals in a state of distress, theyres big money to be made tho!


i never once said it wasnt cruel the parrot trade is awful too.


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> DK the trade in these exotics is so cruel, take monkeys & meerkats for example...in the wild babies stay with their parents in family groups sometimes for the whole of their lives...bred in captivity they are torn away far too young leaving all the animals in a state of distress, theyres big money to be made tho!


Hit the nail on the head there my friend......MONEY


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

gr33neyes said:


> Hit the nail on the head there my friend......MONEY


Yeah exactly but isnt this how all animals today where demesticated ? the motivation would have been money, i mean way way back how where dogs treated


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> I didnt say i would i actually said i dont agree with wild caught parents, but sadly it happens what i did say the babies they produce are in my opinion starting demestication so its not as bad on them, they will still act wild but it would be a start, I dont agree with the wild animals been caught and bred from but its happend now and the babys offerd for sale or often tame.


its all wrong..some where down the line two of the animals will have been caught and breed from..weather it be the parents, the grand parents, the grand parents parents ect!! 
But hey thats my views..that would be like me taking two foxes from work breeding them raising the cubs my self and then selling them! ut: 
Pfftt!!! as if i would much rather see it run back off to where it belongs..

and what happens to these animals when they turn on some one! 
what happens when there not good enough to breed from! 
does it bare thinking about! NO and im betting there not released again


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> its all wrong..some where down the line two of the animals will have been caught and breed from..weather it be the parents, the grand parents, the grand parents parents ect!!
> But hey thats my views..that would be like me taking two foxes from work breeding them raising the cubs my self and then selling them! ut:
> Pfftt!!! as if i would much rather see it run back off to where it belongs..
> 
> ...


ive never once said it was right but all animals went thought this...... so maybe we are selfish for owning animals?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> i never once said it wasnt cruel the parrot trade is awful too.


ive heard that about parrots too, a lot of smuggling goes on aswell, no wonder many species are almost gone from the wild its so sad us humans av got a lot to answer for



gr33neyes said:


> Hit the nail on the head there my friend......MONEY


yes i hate the exploitation of any animal, there are no licences to protect marmosets, meerkats etc , the government are useless!


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> ive never once said it was right but all animals went thought this...... so maybe we are selfish for owning animals?


we wasnt around when dogs and the like was domesticated! and i wouldnt have agreed with it then as much as i love my dogs!  but whats done is done! and it doesnt needed doing any futhure!
People think they have the right to mess with anything these days! and thats where the problem is.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> Yeah exactly but isnt this how all animals today where demesticated ? the motivation would have been money, i mean way way back how where dogs treated


no the domestication of dogs occured naturally and was beneficial to both species

ive copied this.........
It's Bad for the Animals
Experts believe that it took at least five thousand years, and perhaps longer than ten thousand years, for wolves to evolve into dogs. So, there are thousands of years of difference between a wild and a domestic animal. Domesticated animals like dogs and cats don't do well without people, and wild and exotic animals don't do well with people.

In addition, the little we do know of the needs of exotic animals shows us that we simply cannot meet these needs in captivity. Many monkeys, birds, and wild cats, for example, all can travel several miles in a single day. A walk on a leash through the park won't cut it. Since the vast majority of people who keep exotic animals cannot meet their needs, the animals may be caged, chained, or even beaten into submission. Sometimes, people will have an animal's teeth or claws removed, so that the animal cannot harm the owner even when he does struggle


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Wild animals should stay as they are I think, with as little interference from us as possible


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

Even though thousands of animals are bred in captivity every year for us to keep as pets.....I do wonder if there is a longing somewhere deep inside them, that they know there is something else. That they know they weren't born to live in a house, in a cage, in a tank......in a pretty little room that we think is wonderful but is still captivity.They still have instincts....so how do they follow these instincts in an unnatural enviroment.

I wonder if a' rescued from the wild animal' finds captivity a living hell even though it knows it would have died if left to see out its own fate. How would we feel if that decision was taken away from us?


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> we wasnt around when dogs and the like was domesticated! and i wouldnt have agreed with it then as much as i love my dogs!  but whats done is done! and it doesnt needed doing any futhure!


thats what i am meaning. how long have skunks and the like been kept as pets, i dont know this is interesting, i am not posting to argue just to learn. I dont know how long they have been demesticated as such


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> no the domestication of dogs occured naturally and was beneficial to both species
> 
> ive copied this.........
> It's Bad for the Animals
> ...


So true! the last bit it just soo sad..people would remove teeth! why ohh yes so they have a "different" animals from some one else!


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

i cant really commet as theres bound to be lots of different theories. maybe the law should change you shouldnt be aloud to breed from wild animals.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

gr33neyes said:


> I wonder if a' rescued from the wild animal' finds captivity a living hell even though it knows it would have died if left to see out its own fate. How would we feel if that decision was taken away from us?


They hate it! were i worked we had 3legged foxes that cant be released for that reason as well as redkites that had the top part of beak missing, blind badgers and lots more other little poor animals ! They are terrifed! we have to go and feed them and the animals hate it! they run in the other direction as fast as they can! why? because PEOPLE are not part of a normal wild animals life..thats how it should be and how it DEFO should stay.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

to wild animals people are predators! to the bigger species we are prey i suppose


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> yeah it is, but then again a male cat would smell if left un neuterd and it sprayed and people can deal with that so i suppose if your dedicated and love the animal it wont matter to you.


More about making money me thinks..


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> More about making money me thinks..


how is that making money??? im lost on that one


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> how is that making money??? im lost on that one


you said they put up with it for the love of the animals! i said more about making money (from breeding them)! no one that loved wild animals would keep one as a pet!


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> you said they put up with it for the love of the animals! i said more about making money (from breeding them)! no one that loved wild animals would keep one as a pet!


i was saying as in a demesticated cat if left whole can spray and may smell..... but people love the animals and wish to keep them whole it dosent mean they want to breed or anything, i was refering to skunk smell


----------



## FREE SPIRIT (Jul 8, 2009)

DevilDogz said:


> you said they put up with it for the love of the animals! i said more about making money (from breeding them)! no one that loved wild animals would keep one as a pet!


Id love to keep wolves if i had the money and the space


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

FREE SPIRIT said:


> Id love to keep wolves if i had the money and the space


can they be kept as pets? ive never seen any.


----------



## FREE SPIRIT (Jul 8, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> can they be kept as pets? ive never seen any.


Dont know about in this country but i saw a documentary once where a guy had a wolf and a german shepherd and they got on great.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> i was saying as in a demesticated cat if left whole can spray and may smell..... but people love the animals and wish to keep them whole it dosent mean they want to breed or anything, i was refering to skunk smell


you took it wrong! i was refering to people dont put up with the smell of WILD animals for love..because if it was they woundnt have them in the first place..my post wasnt aimed at cats.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

FREE SPIRIT said:


> Id love to keep wolves if i had the money and the space


so would i..but never would as its not fair on the animal.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

FREE SPIRIT said:


> Dont know about in this country but i saw a documentary once where a guy had a wolf and a german shepherd and they got on great.


yeah i saw that was really interesting


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> you took it wrong! i was refering to people dont put up with the smell of WILD animals for love..because if it was they woundnt have them in the first place..my post wasnt aimed at cats.


but babys born in a cage imo are not wild. they may come from wild parents but they themselves arnt wild.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> but babys born in a cage imo are not wild. they may come from wild parents but they themselves arnt wild.


if the parents hadnt have been catched and breed from and left in a cage then any off spring would be wild! the babies are took off there mum and hand reared so they dont get any NATURAL instints! if left with the mum then i doubt they would be domesticated!
stressing the mum and babies out


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

I would love to keep a skunk (after lots of research) but my boyfriend would never allow it rrr: hes such a party pooper somtimes.

In the future I would really like to have a ferret,rabbit,hamster,rats,dogs,hedgehogs, lizards,snakes,frogs 

I doubt it as my boyfriends is anti pets to anything but dogs ut:


----------



## cat001 (Apr 12, 2008)

For me it depends on how many generations the animal has been in captivity for and if the owner is able to cater for that animals needs and requirements. I don't agree with animals being plucked straight out of the wild (unless it's a must, for example, increase the gene pool for captive breeding programs) but if the animal is raised with humans, as was it's great grand parents etc then I don't agree with "releasing" or abandoning captive bred animals into the wild therefore they must be looked after as 'pets'. I also think animals that are endangered should only be on breeding programs in the care of proffesionals and not publically distibuted as pets. I also think certain species which require specialised care should only go to knowledgable owners, certain animals may appeal to certain people but those people may not have the correct understanding of how to care for that animal. perhaps some sort of interview by breeders to check if the would be owner will be able to care for the animal and ensure that animal will live a content life? As long as the welfare of the animal is not compramised I don't have a problem.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

wild animals will still have their wild instincts even though they are born in a cage and raised with humans ... to domesticate an animal it takes hundreds and hundreds of years and this happens only by selective breeding by choosing the traits u want to keep and getting rid off the traits u dont want in the animal.
So even though the wild animals are born and raised in between humans and havent experinced the wild life as such the insticts remain and the human is not really able to fullfill those needs in a way needed to keep the animals life happy and most of all fullfilled 

The animal, though socialized with humans will still see the human as an predator and in situations, unexpected by the human, will either react with fear or with aggression....

then the animal will act "wild"... it will scratch, destroy, bite etc etc and that often is too much too handle and not easy if not impossible to train out....


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> if the parents hadnt have been catched and breed from and left in a cage then any off spring would be wild! the babies are took off there mum and hand reared so they dont get any NATURAL instints! if left with the mum then i doubt they would be domesticated!
> stressing the mum and babies out


they will get natural instincts still its genetically inherited some of it. I agree its not nice but i am mainly talking about babies that have been bred in captivity and that are offerd for sale as pets.


----------



## srhdufe (Feb 11, 2009)

Nicky09 said:


> Some I don't mind skunks are pretty domesticated for example and I would love to own one. But a lot no unless you have a very very experienced owner and they're kept as they would be say in a zoo or whatever. But as housepets no and especially not the larger ones I'm still finding it hard to believe people kept lions as house pets.


They used to sell lions in Harrods


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

Natik said:


> wild animals will still have their wild instincts even though they are born in a cage and raised with humans ... to domesticate an animal it takes hundreds and hundreds of years and this happens only by selective breeding by choosing the traits u want to keep and getting rid off the traits u dont want in the animal.
> So even though the wild animals are born and raised in between humans and havent experinced the wild life as such the insticts remain and the human is not really able to fullfill those needs in a way needed to keep the animals life happy and most of all fullfilled
> 
> The animal, though socialized with humans will still see the human as an predator and in situations, unexpected by the human, will either react with fear or with aggression....
> ...


couldnt agree more.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> they will get natural instincts still its genetically inherited some of it. I agree its not nice but i am mainly talking about babies that have been bred in captivity and that are offerd for sale as pets.


of course they will! nope its not nice its evil..just because there bred in captivity doesnt mean they lose everything wild about them...
I would like to know what happens to them when they get to much for people to care for and people realise they have made a big mistake ... or what happens when these nut case people have took all the babies they need!


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

Natik said:


> wild animals will still have their wild instincts even though they are born in a cage and raised with humans ... to domesticate an animal it takes hundreds and hundreds of years and this happens only by selective breeding by choosing the traits u want to keep and getting rid off the traits u dont want in the animal.
> So even though the wild animals are born and raised in between humans and havent experinced the wild life as such the insticts remain and the human is not really able to fullfill those needs in a way needed to keep the animals life happy and most of all fullfilled
> 
> The animal, though socialized with humans will still see the human as an predator and in situations, unexpected by the human, will either react with fear or with aggression....
> ...


EXACTLY!!! some sense! thank god.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> of course they will! nope its not nice its evil..just because there bred in captivity doesnt mean they lose everything wild about them...
> I would like to know what happens to them when they get to much for people to care for and people realise they have made a big mistake ... or what happens when these nut case people have took all the babies they need!


the same applies for dogs and everyother animal, some dogs are born more vicious then others theres animals put to sleep every day for numbers of reasons.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

DKDREAM said:


> the same applies for dogs and everyother animal, some dogs are born more vicious then others theres animals put to sleep every day for numbers of reasons.


NO its not the same! wild animals bite because its all they know..they need to protect them selves and to them we are predetors...dogs bite because of the up bringing they have had or because of other behavioural problems..it really isnt the same.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> NO its not the same! wild animals bite because its all they know..they need to protect them selves and to them we are predetors...dogs bite because of the up bringing they have had or because of other behavioural problems..it really isnt the same.


agree to disagree theres dog breeds that are crossed from wolves is there not? sorry but i feel sometimes people get in the mind set dogs arnt wild animals they are


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2009)

they was there no longer and havent been for thousands of years..and i have never had it in my head that they wasnt!
Like i said earlier if i was around when dogs were domesticated i wouldnt have agreed then..maybe i feel how i do because i worked with wild animals and saw what people did to them! There best left alone.


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

I think in general it is best to leave wild animals where they are.
I do however think that many "wild" animals can be tamed by someone who knows a lot about them and can live in a "home" environment if that is safer for them.

However what I do object to is "wild" animals being placed in very domestic situations because they are cute or very expensive or part of some, as someone said, the "I want therefore I get" society.

Wild animals in captivity, need proper enclosures, giving them some semblance of "wild" normality, with their own kind if they are sociable eg meerkats, and some privacy if they are not.
Many animals have huge territories in the wild, many are very intelligent and spend their time hunting or searching for food or problem solving or looking for mates/companions or are part of a large family group. Shutting them away in houses so we can have something to cuddle or stroke while watching TV, doesn't seem fair.


----------



## bucksmum (Jul 19, 2009)

DevilDogz said:


> There wild animals and thats where they should stay! the only people that want to own these animals are selfish and do not have the animals best intrests at heart! . . . This is one of the things i feel strongest about im 1000% against it.


I agree with you completely.I wish more people had this attitude and realised how stressful it is for a wild animal to be confined and handled by humans


----------



## cat001 (Apr 12, 2008)

Natik said:


> wild animals will still have their wild instincts even though they are born in a cage and raised with humans ... to domesticate an animal it takes hundreds and hundreds of years and this happens only by selective breeding by choosing the traits u want to keep and getting rid off the traits u dont want in the animal.
> So even though the wild animals are born and raised in between humans and havent experinced the wild life as such the insticts remain and the human is not really able to fullfill those needs in a way needed to keep the animals life happy and most of all fullfilled
> 
> The animal, though socialized with humans will still see the human as an predator and in situations, unexpected by the human, will either react with fear or with aggression....
> ...


Yes, wild animals may have their instincts but if raised in captivity from birth they will adapt certain behaviours which will certainly not help them in the wild.

Take my reptiles for example, many generations captive bred though i'm sure you'd not class them as 'domestic', despite this they adapt certain behaviours such as stalking humans that pass the enclosure, in the wild this behaviour would most certainly get them killed though the animals themselves understand that stalking people will attract attention and get them food. They also display no fear of other animals, for example I had one of the geckos in the garden during the summer, the rabbit came extremely close to inspect, the gecko did not even flinch, once again an adapted behaviour, they've never known predators so do not react to any animal as a predator. They have also always known to eat from the end of feeding tongs so do not know to hunt. My snakes also become increasingly curious and come out of hiding and to the front of the enclosure doors on feeding day when I am infront of the enclosures, once they were raised ignarant of predators and see humans as a provider. They are also tap trained, when I tap the front of the vivarium they come rushing to the front fully expecting dinner which once again shows their ability to adapt to a captive environment, behaving like this in the wild to such vibrations would only get them killed. They also do not strike feed. The hatchling snakes willingly slither up my arm, they do not run away, they also show no fear of other animals.

What I'm saying from this is you must take learnt behaviours into consideration aswell when looking at wild animals, there was a case when several zoo-bred Golden Lion Tamarins were being prepared for release into the wild, though after release many fell out of the trees as they were used to climbing on sturdy lumber trees, not used to clinging on to swaying branches, as a result they stayed low to the ground and many succumb to predation. So I maintain that if an animal is brought up in captivity then it should remain in captivity (with the exception of re-introductions to increase wild populations provided the animal has been taught how to survive in the wild) and wild animals remain the the wild with the single exception as stated in previous post, only if it is for the benefit of the species.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> the same applies for dogs and everyother animal, some dogs are born more vicious then others theres animals put to sleep every day for numbers of reasons.


but dogs are at the end of the day domsticated, unfortunatly they dont all have good temprements and in most cases humans are to blame for this.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> but babys born in a cage imo are not wild. they may come from wild parents but they themselves arnt wild.





DKDREAM said:


> they will get natural instincts still its genetically inherited some of it. I agree its not nice but i am mainly talking about babies that have been bred in captivity and that are offerd for sale as pets.


even captive bred wild animals still retain innate behaviours which they usally cant fulfil in captivity


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

I don't agree with it - They should stay in the wild where they belong


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

DevilDogz said:


> There wild animals and thats where they should stay! the only people that want to own these animals are selfish and do not have the animals best intrests at heart! . . . This is one of the things i feel strongest about im 1000% against it.


Could not agree more - well said


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

cat001 said:


> Yes, wild animals may have their instincts but if raised in captivity from birth they will adapt certain behaviours which will certainly not help them in the wild. .......... So I maintain that if an animal is brought up in captivity then it should remain in captivity (with the exception of re-introductions to increase wild populations provided the animal has been taught how to survive in the wild) ....


I so agree, when I see wild life program and see the great "release back into the wild" day, often of animals that have spent their entire life in captivity I just cringe as I know for a lot of these they are entering the last day, days of their lives, as they have no skills to enable them to cope in the wild whatsoever. I think sometimes it is better for the GP to think of them having a great "in the wild" life but how many actually survive any length of time to enjoy it.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> but dogs are at the end of the day domsticated, unfortunatly they dont all have good temprements and in most cases humans are to blame for this.


i know dogs are demesticated now but surley they went through the same process as birds/monkeys etc will/have. it can be argued that keeping animals is selfish in some peoples eyes, i think we all have to just respect eachothers views or this will go on and on.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cat001 said:


> Yes, wild animals may have their instincts but if raised in captivity from birth they will adapt certain behaviours which will certainly not help them in the wild.
> 
> What I'm saying from this is you must take learnt behaviours into consideration aswell when looking at wild animals, there was a case when several zoo-bred Golden Lion Tamarins were being prepared for release into the wild, though after release many fell out of the trees as they were used to climbing on sturdy lumber trees, not used to clinging on to swaying branches, as a result they stayed low to the ground and many succumb to predation. So I maintain that if an animal is brought up in captivity then it should remain in captivity (with the exception of re-introductions to increase wild populations provided the animal has been taught how to survive in the wild) and wild animals remain the the wild with the single exception as stated in previous post, only if it is for the benefit of the species.


well that zoo did a poor job of preparing them for life back in the wild, but thank goodness there are now 1,500 Golden lion tamarins back in the forests where they belong thanks to successful reintroductions from captive bred Tamarins.



lauren001 said:


> I so agree, when I see wild life program and see the great "release back into the wild" day, often of animals that have spent their entire life in captivity I just cringe as I know for a lot of these they are entering the last day, days of their lives, as they have no skills to enable them to cope in the wild whatsoever. I think sometimes it is better for the GP to think of them having a great "in the wild" life but how many actually survive any length of time to enjoy it.


i dont think theyres anything more sad than a wild animal looking out through the bars of a cage, the only animals i think that should be kept in captivity are enangered species to breed & where ever possible release them back into the wild, many many species have been successfully reintroduced back to the wild its an important part of conservation these days & its all down to captive breeding programs, zoo's like aspinalls have even successfully reintroduced captive bred lowland gorillas back into the wild, they keep their animals in naturalistic enclosures & this is the only way any wild animal should be kept if it has to live out its life in captivity.

pet homes could never provide this, so i dont agree with breeding & selling them for pets full stop!


----------



## kelseye (Aug 16, 2009)

saying that i have iguanas and they should be wild realy!!!god this post make me feel bad:blushing:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> i know dogs are demesticated now but surley they went through the same process as birds/monkeys etc will/have. it can be argued that keeping animals is selfish in some peoples eyes, i think we all have to just respect eachothers views or this will go on and on.


no thats not true domestication is a mutually beneficial process which usually evolves over thousands of years, domestic animals have no place in the wild they have diverged from their wild ancestors, but monkeys etc live as part of an eco system, they dont need or do well with human interferance, its incredibly selfish to buy them for pets it just perpetuate this vile trade.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

Origin of the domestic dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ive read this and it says that people used to eat dogs etc Possibley they took wild cubs and reared them etc


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

If it was a a case of

"Wild animals should stay in the wild where they belong"

then none of use would have pet dogs, or cats or anything else.

I understand it takes a long time to domesticate animals, however just because some animals are newly becoming pets, doesn't make it wrong (I am sure I have said that already) Maybe in years to come, some animals we are talking about now, might make excellent pets.

Unfortunatly, almost any animal can e kept as a pet. You name it, produce enough money and I am quite sure someone will get it for you. Scandalous I know, but it happens.
Of course there are laws, legislations and acts in place to try and stop this, but it will happen on the black market.

I agree that some animals should not be kept by people full stop. But I certainty wouldn't put reptiles in this group.

There are a few Komodo Dragons knocking about in private collections.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DKDREAM said:


> Origin of the domestic dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Ive read this and it says that people used to eat dogs etc Possibley they took wild cubs and reared them etc


the most popular theory is that certain groups of wolves chose to live alongside man & scavenged for food and as the generations became more docile even possibly hunted together, i know some scientists believe wolf cubs were taken & reared but even so they wouldnt have been kept in cages so they still could roam & behave like a wolf.
all agree tho that dog domestication took thousands of years.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> If it was a a case of
> 
> "Wild animals should stay in the wild where they belong"
> 
> ...


but you would be 'forcing' domsetication on these animals, what about those that will suffer in the mean time? its such a slow process

and there are no laws and legislation for animals like marmosets & meerkats any fool can buy one, its disgraceful.

i am gob smacked to hear that komodo dragons are in private collections in this county, i really am curious to know who?


----------



## turkeylad (Mar 1, 2009)

DevilDogz said:


> There wild animals and thats where they should stay! the only people that want to own these animals are selfish and do not have the animals best intrests at heart! . . . This is one of the things i feel strongest about im 1000% against it.


Absolutely could not have put it better!!!!:cursing::cursing:


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

to me a wild animal (and im not talking about dogs here ) kept as a pet has lost its beauty and spirit and becomes like some sort of robot with a purpose to satisfy humans need to rule over any living creature .... 

Its all about owning something "special" and unusuall..... and even the dangerous aspect of some animals is something which gives people a kick and rush of adrenalin....


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Wow! I've had to catch up a lot and i had to dash off quick last night!

I personally don't use the whole 'dogs/cats' thing etc

Yes they were once wild.......but not the breeds of today!!! However you go and get a Meerkat, Skunk, Porcupine etc etc then they are exactly the SAME as the wild ones. Only a lot more sad, depressed and wrongly raised.
Still the same 'wildness' in them. They have not been molded properly into domestic pets.

As has already been said it took so many thousands of years to domesticate the cat and dog. And for the benefit of human and animal. Also cats and dogs pretty much chose to domesticate themselves.

I don't see how keeping wild animals now will benefit them?? It is for selfish reasons for the 'owner' its a case of 'I WANT'

How will keeping a Skunk/Meerkat (etc etc) enrich its life??

I do understand that keeping exotic and wild species will be expensive and rightly so......but it doesn't stop just anyone getting hold of them.

Leave as they should be and appreciate the fact they are happy, content and living life as they should.

I find nothing more elating than seeing wild animals kept properly. Preferably in the wild, but i also agree with conservations and nature reserves. As they are helping these beautiful to remain as they should, while trying to edcucate the public and the needs of them to save many from extintion.

Would you rather see a Meerkat with all his buddies in the wild/conservation to mimic the wild.................or in ahouse having to live with kids/cats/dogs?? I know where my vote is... where its always been and always will be.


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

I agree with you Acacia on how some animals should be left alone. But if I ever do get a skunk (I highly doubt it as it is) I'd do bending over back reseach like i do with an pet/topic im interested in.


----------



## jenniferx (Jan 23, 2009)

My own opinion is that, outside of the truly ludicrous (Rhino, tigers etc...)it is species dependant, circumstantially and sometimes individualistically dependant as to whether or not it's appropriate to keep certain animals. I think that, to an extent human selfishness is the root of all pet ownership and I certainly wouldn't pretend that I don't 'get' anything out of owning mine. Domestic or otherwise. 

IMO because there are so many variables at work, it is reductionist to just say outright that it is unethical to keep anything other than dogs/cats. I think the issue largely boils down to the extent to which a persons desire to own an animal compromises on it's needs and quality of life. And that certainly applies to domestic animals as well.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

jenniferx said:


> My own opinion is that, outside of the truly ludicrous (Rhino, tigers etc...)it is species dependant, circumstantially and sometimes individualistically dependant as to whether or not it's appropriate to keep certain animals. I think that, to an extent human selfishness is the root of all pet ownership and I certainly wouldn't pretend that I don't 'get' anything out of owning mine. Domestic or otherwise.
> 
> IMO because there are so many variables at work, it is reductionist to just say outright that it is unethical to keep anything other than dogs/cats. I think the issue largely boils down to the extent to which a persons desire to own an animal compromises on it's needs and quality of life. And that certainly applies to domestic animals as well.


but the difference between keeping a 'domestic' animal & a wild one is there is no place for say cats & dogs in the wild, they are totally happy with humans because of their domestication, they rely on us... so its mutually beneficial, totally opposite to a wild animal .


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

Natik said:


> to me a wild animal (and im not talking about dogs here ) kept as a pet has lost its beauty and spirit and becomes like some sort of robot with a purpose to satisfy humans need to rule over any living creature ....
> 
> Its all about owning something "special" and unusuall..... and even the dangerous aspect of some animals is something which gives people a kick and rush of adrenalin....


Agreed! The permants we have in where i worked (omg that sound weird to say i dont work there no more ..) always looked so scared and was out of anything they know! as a wild life hospital they give the best to the animals if there permants, but to me that is not enough! wild animals are not like dogs and cats..they dont rely on anyone..they do everything they need to do when and how they want to! no one can ever give certain animals the life there use to and most of all the life they DESERVE! I love seeing wild life running/flying free it was bad enough to see some of the permants in the wildlife place kept away from what they know..
Its wrong and to me its not the animals benifit to domesticate it..NO its the selfish, thoughtless, greedy person that needed there next status symbol


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> but you would be 'forcing' domsetication on these animals, what about those that will suffer in the mean time? its such a slow process
> 
> and there are no laws and legislation for animals like marmosets & meerkats any fool can buy one, its disgraceful.
> 
> i am gob smacked to hear that komodo dragons are in private collections in this county, i really am curious to know who?


I don't know who, I just know of them. People who keep such animals are incredibly secret about it. Not because there are keeping the animals in bad ways, just it's in their best interest not to attract busy bodies.
Of course, not just anybody can legally own what's classed as a wild animal.
Anything on the DWA is highly controlled. I am quite sure the local council would have to be satisfied that the person was responsible, that the animals is to be well looked after and that it can't escape - before a license is issued.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> Wow! I've had to catch up a lot and i had to dash off quick last night!
> 
> I personally don't use the whole 'dogs/cats' thing etc
> 
> ...


Maybe they are the same as the wild ones, because there is no need for them to change?
Maybe that's what is selfish? Us deciding which breeds of dog to make up next?
I am quite sure that a dog which closely resembles the wild dogs would do just fine, if it had to, without people. Maybe not one of the breeds of today though - but that's our fault.

Of course it's a case of I want! Just like people go out and buy a specific breed of dog - because they want it.

I am not talking about exotic animals living in houses. There are to be kept in suitable enclosures - just in private collections. As long as they are captive bred, there isn't anything wrong with that.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> I don't know who, I just know of them. People who keep such animals are incredibly secret about it. Not because there are keeping the animals in bad ways, just it's in their best interest not to attract busy bodies.
> Of course, not just anybody can legally own what's classed as a wild animal.
> Anything on the DWA is highly controlled. I am quite sure the local council would have to be satisfied that the person was responsible, that the animals is to be well looked after and that it can't escape - before a license is issued.


In a previous post you said you said this...I know people who have Komodo Dragons, Tigers and Crocs.......so i thought you knew them personally:blushing:

'highly controlled' with regards to keeping the gp safe maybe, but many wild animals in private collections live in appaling conditions as they do in many british zoo's, councils are all but useless they know nothing of the animals requirements.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Maybe they are the same as the wild ones, because there is no need for them to change?
> Maybe that's what is selfish? Us deciding which breeds of dog to make up next?
> I am quite sure that a dog which closely resembles the wild dogs would do just fine, if it had to, without people. Maybe not one of the breeds of today though - but that's our fault.
> 
> ...


my huskies are a natural primitive breed & maybe some of them could survive in the wild, but youre missing the point, there is no place for them in the wild because they are not part of any eco system, they would wreak havoc on wildlife.

i disagree unless they are part of a captive breeding program private collectors shouldnt be breeding them...where do the surplus go??


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> In a previous post you said you said this...I know people who have Komodo Dragons, Tigers and Crocs.......so i thought you knew them personally:blushing:
> 
> 'highly controlled' with regards to keeping the gp safe maybe, but many wild animals in private collections live in appaling conditions as they do in many british zoo's, councils are all but useless they know nothing of the animals requirements.


Not not personally. I know of people who do know them personally though.
Maybe I should I have put the word "of" inbetween know and people.....

True. But I bet it's not actually as many as you think.

I also know lots of dogs, cats, and other pets which live in appalling conditions too.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> my huskies are a natural primitive breed & maybe some of them could survive in the wild, but youre missing the point, there is no place for them in the wild because they are not part of any eco system, they would wreak havoc on wildlife.
> 
> i disagree unless they are part of a captive breeding program private collectors shouldnt be breeding them...where do the surplus go??


It's supply and demand. There is no surplus, because the demand is high.

There isn't a place for them in the wild, because we made them how they are. There are lots of wild dogs, which fit into the food chain nicely.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

People also was bring up the dogs and cats! there nothing like wild animals anymore! Yes its wrong to have dogs and cats in horrid conditions and im the first to say that but that has nothing to do with how some one would breed domesticaed "wild" animals!..
People need to see the bigger picture! NO-ONE can give a wild animal what it needs! NO-ONE knows the full extent of what a wild animal needs and NO-ONE would take such beautiful animals away from the life they do well in for the love of them! its about what the people want and that isnt fair!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Not not personally. I know of people who do know them personally though.
> Maybe I should I have put the word "of" inbetween know and people.....
> 
> True. But I bet it's not actually as many as you think.
> ...


but any kept in appaling conditions is too many & i actually disagree i think most wont have anythink like adequate conditions

i also know of dogs,cats etc kept in appaling conditions but two wrongs dont make a right!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> but any kept in appaling conditions is too many & i actually disagree i think most wont have anythink like adequate conditions
> 
> i also know of dogs,cats etc kept in appaling conditions but two wrongs dont make a right!


So shall we ban dogs and cats as pets, because any suffering is too many?

No of course not. The animals which need to be are legislated properly. Any animal which can be obtained has a chance of not being looked after properly. That's just the way it is.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> It's supply and demand. There is no surplus, because the demand is high.
> 
> There isn't a place for them in the wild, because we made them how they are. There are lots of wild dogs, which fit into the food chain nicely.


so are you saying private collections breed for money after all?

yes exactly they were 'Domesticated' thousands of years ago & mans natural selection of them produced the breeds we see today.

yes there are lots of wild canids that fit nicely into the food chain like the dhole,african hunting dog, wolf, coyote etc....but theyre All WILD


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

NO wild animal can be looked after properly out of the wild  not hard to understand i think these people that are all for it should spend some time with wild animals treating and caring for them to see them released back to the wild its amazing! i think people could learn alot from it! there not pets and NEVER should be.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> So shall we ban dogs and cats as pets, because any suffering is too many?
> 
> No of course not. The animals which need to be are legislated properly. Any animal which can be obtained has a chance of not being looked after properly. That's just the way it is.


No we should have tough legislation to protect domestic pets & stiff penalties if they are neglected or abused.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> NO wild animal can be looked after properly out of the wild  not hard to understand i think these people that are all for it should spend some time with wild animals treating and caring for them to see them released back to the wild its amazing! i think people could learn alot from it! there not pets and NEVER should be.


agreed!!!...


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> so are you saying private collections breed for money after all?
> 
> yes exactly they were 'Domesticated' thousands of years ago & mans natural selection of them produced the breeds we see today.
> 
> yes there are lots of wild canids that fit nicely into the food chain like the dhole,african hunting dog, wolf, coyote etc....but theyre All WILD


I never said that they didn't.... There will be lots of breeders of exotic animals, that included animals on the DWA.

Lets just define Wild here. Wild means living in a state of nature, without human aid or care. Most dogs can do that. Apart from some that we have designed. 
Any dog that can find it's own food, can fit into the natural eco-system.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> NO wild animal can be looked after *properly* out of the wild  not hard to understand i think these people that are all for it should spend some time with wild animals treating and caring for them to see them released back to the wild its amazing! i think people could learn alot from it! there not pets and NEVER should be.


What exactly do you define as properly? Copious amounts of space? A natural diet? No human contact?

Because I am quite sure, that's what a lot of people I know of, provide already for their DWA animals.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

Remember that without captive collections quite a few species would otherwise be extinct.

I'll get my jacket... :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> I never said that they didn't.... There will be lots of breeders of exotic animals, that included animals on the DWA.
> 
> Lets just define Wild here. Wild means living in a state of nature, without human aid or care. Most dogs can do that. Apart from some that we have designed.
> Any dog that can find it's own food, can fit into the natural eco-system.


sorry your definition of 'wild' & mine are different just because a 'wild' domestic dog can find food dosent mean it fits into an eco system thats just how eco systems are destroyed by putting an 'alien' animal that never evolved together with the fauna & flora of that particular area, for example the introduction of the red fox in Australia has caused devestation to many native species of mammal some of which have all but disappeared! the fox is doing great tho.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

MissG said:


> What exactly do you define as properly? Copious amounts of space? A natural diet? No human contact?
> 
> Because I am quite sure, that's what a lot of people I know of, provide already for their DWA animals.


what i mean is for the animal to have the CHOICE where to be! eat when it wants not when its chucked in..live a NORMAL wild animal life! be part of a pack have the choice to set up a home where the ANIMAL chooses..to..you see no matter how people go on about it these wild animals will never have a normal life in captivity because they dont have a choice..

I mean look at lions..it.alright throwing fresh meat into them! but being a lion they have to WORK for there food, by catching it and killing it them selves..throwing in meat isnt normal..also catching there food is good exercise for them..what exercise do they get in enclosuers..?? none and im sure people dont put a couple of alive deers in for them to catch.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> sorry your definition of 'wild' & mine are different just because a 'wild' domestic dog can find food dosent mean it fits into an eco system thats just how eco systems are destroyed by putting an 'alien' animal that never evolved together with the fauna & flora of that particular area, for example the introduction of the red fox in Australia has caused devestation to many native species of mammal some of which have all but disappeared! the fox is doing great tho.


That's because the fox fit's in nicely. It's a dog eat dog world, survival of the fittest. The fox thrived because they were plenty to eat. Unfortunately, that meant it's prey didn't do so well.

The only point I was trying to make was that someone commented that exotic animals are exactly like they are in the wild - but that's simply because they don't need to change. Dogs, although some won't, could cope just fine without people. That's all. Without going too much into food chains etc.

Most people say that wild is untamed etc etc etc. The definition I gave is the true one.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> what i mean is for the animal to have the CHOICE where to be! eat when it wants not when its chucked in..live a NORMAL wild animal life! be part of a pack have the choice to set up a home where the ANIMAL chooses..to..you see no matter how people go on about it these wild animals will never have a normal life in captivity because they dont have a choice..
> 
> I mean look at lions..it.alright throwing fresh meat into them! but being a lion they have to WORK for there food, by catching it and killing it them selves..throwing in meat isnt normal..also catching there food is good exercise for them..what exercise do they get in enclosuers..?? none and im sure people dont put a couple of alive deers in for them to catch.


Animals hunt because they have to, to stay alive. That doesn't seem like a choice to me.
Give a carcass to a wild lion and I am quite sure it would eat that, rather than spend the time and energy hunting.

Not sure about anyone else, but I never see Lions exercising in the wild. They spend their time resting and grooming. They don't chase their food for exercise, they chase it because it moves, and if they don't, they won't catch it! LOL.
Ok, you then might argue about obesity in captive bred animals - but I would argue that's because the animals are fed too much.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

Im not saying they chase it for because they want to..im saying them chasing there dinner is normal to them .. its good exercise for them there working for it..


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

So could you say do a lion lure coursing type thing to encourage them to chase it? I know at safari parks and stuff they will encourage them to chase things that have food on them


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Im not saying they chase it for because they want to..im saying them chasing there dinner is normal to them .. its good exercise for them there working for it..


But they don't need to exercise much. What's normal to a wild cat, is different to what's normal to a captive one.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Nicky09 said:


> So could you say do a lion lure coursing type thing to encourage them to chase it? I know at safari parks and stuff they will encourage them to chase things that have food on them


They do this with cheetahs at various zoo's. Not Lions so much though, probably because they are bone idle!


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

The males are definately anyway the females aren't so much from the little I know.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

MissG said:


> But they don't need to exercise much. What's normal to a wild cat, is different to what's normal to a captive one.


How do you know they dont need excerise!  most mammals do infact most animals do!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> How do you know they dont need excerise!  most mammals do infact most animals do!


Just from my studies. And I said much.

Most animals need exercise? Well baring in mind that 80% of all animals are insects I would say that something not quite right there. I think it would probably be around 5% of all animals need exercise.


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

Insects travel really far so therefore need the exercise


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

I wasnt including insects was i lmfao !! but they do travel lots and far so i beg to differ they DO need excercise


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Nicky09 said:


> Insects travel really far so therefore need the exercise


Some insects spend their time travelling because they have to, not because they need the exercise.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> I wasnt including insects was i lmfao !! but they do travel lots and need excersise


But why not? They're animals. And they make up most animals, and they don't need exercise..... Just a thought!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

An insect not doing exercise would not suffer at all from that. An animal which did need exercise, would. That's the difference between needing and not needing.
Just because they do it, doesn't mean they need to.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

I wasnt including them because i dont think people would pick a few ants up for a breeding programme! and i do belive the need exercise! They might not think im going for a run but the amount of distance some travel that is exercise in its self.


----------



## FREE SPIRIT (Jul 8, 2009)

DevilDogz said:


> How do you know they dont need excerise!  most mammals do infact most animals do!


Pandas are lazy gits...lol


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

MissG said:


> An insect not doing exercise would not suffer at all from that. An animal which did need exercise, would. That's the difference between needing and not needing.
> Just because they do it, doesn't mean they need to.


ohh wouldnt they? i dont know i have never studied them..you seem to know alot about all wild animals! 

anyway i dont think its right to breed from wild animald for "our" own benifit and never will so there is no point in me being part of this debate my mind it set and nothing will change it! wild animals should stay as nature intended and any true wild life lover would agree! :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> I wasnt including them because i dont think people would pick a few ants up for a breeding programme! and i do belive the need exercise! They might not think im going for a run but the amount of distance some travel that is exercise in its self.


LOL. I didn't know we were only talking about animals in breeding programmes that needed exercise. LOL.
I just thought I would point it out that almost all people don't class insects as animals, and when they say "most animals" they couldn't be further from the truth.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> ohh wouldnt they? i dont know i have never studied them..you seem to know alot about all wild animals!
> 
> anyway i dont think its right to breed from wild animald for "our" own benifit and never will so there is no point in me being part of this debate my mind it set and nothing will change it! wild animals should stay as nature intended and any true wild life lover would agree! :smilewinkgrin:


Well no, being invertebrates, it's not like they will pile on the pounds. Well if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to do my job properly.

No, you're right, there isn't.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

whats your job?


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> whats your job?


I run my own business, in which I take exotic animals into schools to teach children all about their husbandry, diet, habitat etc etc.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

are they your animals then!? thats good..children should know about all the animals they can..
Im out of wildlife work now!  but ill be back


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> are they your animals then!? thats good..children should know about all the animals they can..
> Im out of wildlife work now!  but ill be back


Yep, they all live with me, at my house.


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

I think saying people get wild animals or pets fo a status symbol is a really wide comment to make. I dont have my animals because of a status symbol I have them because I enjoy there company and care about them more then I do the 99% of people in my life.

Guess how many friends I have lol


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

Its just how i feel! there is no other reason for people to take wild animals out of there natural surrondings to keep as pets! you might love them but thats not to say there better of with you than they would have been in the wild! but like i said this is how I feel other feel differently and thats fine but i will never change my mind on this subject.


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

Devil Dogz Im not disagree and im not fully agree with you so Im sorry if it seems im argueing cuz im not. I just thought it was a wide comment to make is all.


----------



## bucksmum (Jul 19, 2009)

DevilDogz said:


> Its just how i feel! there is no other reason for people to take wild animals out of there natural surrondings to keep as pets! you might love them but thats not to say there better of with you than they would have been in the wild! but like i said this is how I feel other feel differently and thats fine but i will never change my mind on this subject.


I completely agree with you DD,it's a shame not everybody has the same understanding of wildlife you do


----------



## charlie9009 (Nov 24, 2008)

I haven't read the whole of this thread, so I'm sorry if I'm going to be repeating anything. 

While I would like to think of wild animals living in the wild, it doesn't always happen, and the dogs, cats and whatever else we all have as pets today were once wild animals too, but none of us have a problem with keeping them. Don't get me wrong, somethings are to dangerous (like big cats) or too complex (like monkeys) to be kept as pets, but other socialble animals like skunks etc I think are ok, as long as they get all the socialisation and correct diet, etc that they need.


----------



## emizlikemyth<3 (Sep 12, 2009)

I LIKE FROGS x


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> That's because the fox fit's in nicely. It's a dog eat dog world, survival of the fittest. The fox thrived because they were plenty to eat. Unfortunately, that meant it's prey didn't do so well.
> 
> The only point I was trying to make was that someone commented that exotic animals are exactly like they are in the wild - but that's simply because they don't need to change. Dogs, although some won't, could cope just fine without people. That's all. Without going too much into food chains etc.
> 
> Most people say that wild is untamed etc etc etc. The definition I gave is the true one.


No they dont 'fit in nicely' at all!! they dont belong there! i cant believe anyone can think its ok, im actually really shocked, look at the devestation foxes would cause to the helpless mammals & birds of Tasmania if they become established!

The Potential Threat to Tasmania's Wildlife
Foxes represents the single most devastating threat to Tasmania's native mammals and birds. This Island State is recognised internationally as a fauna haven due to the lack of introduced predators (such as foxes). Should foxes become established in Tasmania nearly all of the state's native land animals would be at risk.

It is estimated that at least 78 native vertebrate species would be at risk if foxes became established. Of these, 34 species have locally restricted ranges, 16 are suspected to be already declining in distribution and 12 species are threatened according to Commonwealth or State threatened species legislation. This list does not include invertebrate species, many of which would also be at risk of fox predation.

these poor little marsupials would be all but wiped out...and you think its ok cos its survival of the fittest!?
























a domestic dog can if left to its own devices become wild, but at the end of the day its still a domestic dog!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> No they dont 'fit in nicely' at all!! they dont belong there! i cant believe anyone can think its ok, im actually really shocked, look at the devestation foxes would cause to the helpless mammals & birds of Tasmania if they become established!
> 
> The Potential Threat to Tasmania's Wildlife
> Foxes represents the single most devastating threat to Tasmania's native mammals and birds. This Island State is recognised internationally as a fauna haven due to the lack of introduced predators (such as foxes). Should foxes become established in Tasmania nearly all of the state's native land animals would be at risk.
> ...


And do you think that bothers the fox? The fox fits in nicely. The devastation is causes is irrelevant to it. It's thriving. And that is simply all that matters.
Now, that's the point of view of the foxes....not mine.

Again - the point I was initially trying to make - which I think was towards someone elses comment - had absolutely nothing to do with food chains.


----------



## gorgeous (Jan 14, 2009)

Pleccy said:


> Remember that without captive collections quite a few species would otherwise be extinct.
> 
> I'll get my jacket... :smilewinkgrin:


Captive collections are a necessary evil in order to protect the species from extinction! Which I might add is because of the greed of human beings.

THis however is done by 'experts' for the good of the animal and species.

I do not see any similarities however for this justifying people keeping wild animals as pets.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

gorgeous said:


> Captive collections are a necessary evil in order to protect the species from extinction! Which I might add is because of the greed of human beings.
> 
> THis however is done by 'experts' for the good of the animal and species.
> 
> I do not see any similarities however for this justifying people keeping wild animals as pets.


Ah yes but take for example the many hobbyists who breed these species, not for profit, but for conservation purposes. Many of these people develop a fascination in a particular species and the truth is a lot of them aren't experts.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> I never said that they didn't.... There will be lots of breeders of exotic animals, that included animals on the DWA.
> 
> Lets just define Wild here. Wild means living in a state of nature, without human aid or care. Most dogs can do that. Apart from some that we have designed.
> Any dog that can find it's own food, can fit into the natural eco-system.





MissG said:


> And do you think that bothers the fox? The fox fits in nicely. The devastation is causes is irrelevant to it. It's thriving. And that is simply all that matters.
> Now, that's the point of view of the foxes....not mine.
> 
> Again - the point I was initially trying to make - which I think was towards someone elses comment - had absolutely nothing to do with food chains.


this quote is very misleading then.....Any dog that can find it's own food, can fit into the natural eco-system....because they could never be a part of any eco system because they are domesticated! thats why i was making a point with the red foxes of Australasia, they dont belong there they belong in our countryside, domestic dogs dont belong anywhere in the wild.

i think thats the point me & others have been trying to make, exotics belong in the wild & they belong 'to' the wild, domestics dont they belong with humans!


----------



## gorgeous (Jan 14, 2009)

Pleccy said:


> Ah yes but take for example the many hobbyists who breed these species, not for profit, but for conservation purposes. Many of these people develop a fascination in a particular species and the truth is a lot of them aren't experts.


well then they are not true conservationists are they, for if they were they would be doing it for the good of the species...

and I am pretty sure that there intention is not to re release them into the wild,.....:wink5:


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> this quote is very misleading then.....Any dog that can find it's own food, can fit into the natural eco-system....because they could never be a part of any eco system because they are domesticated! thats why i was making a point with the red foxes of Australasia, they dont belong there they belong in our countryside, domestic dogs dont belong anywhere in the wild.
> 
> i think thats the point me & others have been trying to make, exotics belong in the wild & they belong 'to' the wild, domestics dont they belong with humans!


There was nothing misleading about it.

People have kept exotic animals as pets for many, many years.

I just don't get it.

So it's OK for humans to domesticate a dog, but not an exotic animal (that does just as well in captivity)?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> There was nothing misleading about it.
> 
> People have kept exotic animals as pets for many, many years.
> 
> ...


yes exactly even after many many years of being kept as pets they are still unchanged they are still a wild animal,

on the other hand a domestic dog is just that! it diverged from its wild ancestor the wolf thousands of years ago, so its irrelevant whether i think its ok or not. (but the process of domestication was slow & the primitive dogs wernt captive they lived alongside humans)

im afraid many who rescue exotics for example 'monkey world' would argue they certainly dont do just as well in captivity!


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2009)

gorgeous said:


> well then they are not true conservationists are they, for if they were they would be doing it for the good of the species...
> 
> and I am pretty sure that there intention is not to re release them into the wild,.....:wink5:


Actually a lot of non-expert hobbyists buy somewhat-rare species and then pass them onto zoos and other institutions after breeding them successfully, it's all for the good of the species.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> yes exactly even after many many years of being kept as pets they are still unchanged they are still a wild animal,
> 
> on the other hand a domestic dog is just that! it diverged from its wild ancestor the wolf thousands of years ago, so its irrelevant whether i think its ok or not. (but the process of domestication was slow & the primitive dogs wernt captive they lived alongside humans)
> 
> im afraid many who rescue exotics for example 'monkey world' would argue they certainly dont do just as well in captivity!


Monkey's? I don' think monkeys should be kept as pets. I thought we were talking about domestic exotics......


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> There was nothing misleading about it.
> 
> People have kept exotic animals as pets for many, many years.
> 
> ...


dogs been domesticated to serve a purpose .... to help the human with certain jobs .... people needed them as the technology and farming etc wasnt as it is today


----------



## piggybaker (Feb 10, 2009)

I feel that the animals that where stated in the first post are a little far fetched, 

But people find them interesting,, 

But parrots are wild animals even if they are breed in captivity they still retain the need to stretch there wings ect, and they do look so wonderful in the tree tops OK so they add a splash of colour to a living room, not quiet the same impact.

And a skunk in your living room, wow wouldn't want to upset that at least with a dog or a cat they sh*t themselves if they are scared , clean it up bit of fabrezze job done skunk PPPPPPOOOOOOOHHHHH that could last for days, NO THANK YOU i don't want that in my house, those people are mad!


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

MissG said:


> Maybe they are the same as the wild ones, because there is no need for them to change?
> Maybe that's what is selfish? Us deciding which breeds of dog to make up next?
> I am quite sure that a dog which closely resembles the wild dogs would do just fine, if it had to, without people. Maybe not one of the breeds of today though - but that's our fault.
> 
> ...


Says it all really................where in this ''private collection'' oh and ''suitable'' enclosure does this help the animal??


MissG said:


> Not not personally. I know of people who do know them personally though.
> Maybe I should I have put the word "of" inbetween know and people.....
> 
> True. But I bet it's not actually as many as you think.
> ...


When i started this thread i was not talking about dogs and cats! Although everyone knows they were once ''wild'' these species have been domesticated for thousands of years..............oh and pretty much on their own accord for the benefit of human and dog/cat. Look at how far they have got. We have many many pets (and huge rescue epidemics too) these days without ''introducing'' more.

If you have ever seen wild animals.........where they belong...thats the wild. Then you will know the feeling of true elation. Why take these stunning animals to live a life that will ultimately depress their beautiful spirit???? Komodo Dragons?? Tigers?? Crocs?? I am sorry but that is cruelty, i couldn't care less how big the ''private collectioners'' enclosure maybe. This is wrong. I would put more but i would be banned..............

When i started the thead i was talking about introducing 'new' 'wild' animals to the domestic scene. Which is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Meerkats/Skunks/Porcupines/Monkeys/exotic creatures etc etc etc did not introuduce themselves to human kind......no we took them and bred them for our own benefit........money, orginally.

'We' also bred them to a life of no forgiving. It was a case of chucking out young all their lives and then taking the babies away from their mums to be raised by humans and so we can call ''domestically raised'' passed around more times than we could count...........ultimitely for some the end comes with slaughter after no one wants them for any stupid reason or dying of diseases/illnesses/infections or even starvation and neglect.

Does this really sound like a good trade???? Because its time people woke up and smelt the coffee.............sugar coat it all you like but this is the reality of many many so called ''wild and exotic'' pets.........


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

gorgeous said:


> Captive collections are a necessary evil in order to protect the species from extinction! Which I might add is because of the greed of human beings.
> 
> THis however is done by 'experts' for the good of the animal and species.
> 
> I do not see any similarities however for this justifying people keeping wild animals as pets.


I agree with conservations. As you have pointed out its the humans greed and selfishness for other living beings that caused this major, major, problem in wild animal welfare in the first place.

We are our own worst enemy and we are the most awful, nasty being to other creatures....big, small, mammal, bird, fish etc etc

So these trusts and conservations must happen for the benefit of our animal world.........one that deserves its place on this world more than far too may of us ''humans''



Pleccy said:


> Ah yes but take for example the many hobbyists who breed these species, not for profit, but for conservation purposes. Many of these people develop a fascination in a particular species and the truth is a lot of them aren't experts.


Well then why are they doing it?? If they are an a relatively unknown species to the majority of us why are we attempting to play god with the creatures lives?

The experts know what they doing after £1000's and more spent.... and the extremely time consuming education that us 'everyday people' won't get the chance to have. Leave them too it!!!

Do people not understand we can ruin species by encouraging the 'exotic pet' trade??


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Monkey's? I don' think monkeys should be kept as pets. I thought we were talking about domestic exotics......


& yet in your 1st post you said this.....

What we say is "normal" wasn't before it was domesticated. Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong.

I am quite sure that a long time ago, there would have been some people who were very sceptical about domesticating dogs. But look how that turned out.

*I think when you say the word pet,you think of a household creature,which you have close contact with. But that isnt always the case.*. I know people who have *Komodo Dragons,Tigers and Crocs*. .........

i mentioned monkeys just as an example, but its great to see you at least agree keeping these is wrong


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> & yet in your 1st post you said this.....
> 
> What we say is "normal" wasn't before it was domesticated. Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong.
> 
> ...


Hang on. Where are you going?

When I posted about it being Ok to domesticate a dog, but not an exotic......why on earth would that mean a Komodo or such? These animals can not be domesticated! _At that point _in the conversation, I was talking about domesticated exotics. The kind which I think are fine to own. Not pet DWA animals.

You can't keep a wild animal as a pet, as wild means without the care of aid of a human, which of course that animal would have.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> Says it all really................where in this ''private collection'' oh and ''suitable'' enclosure does this help the animal??
> 
> When i started this thread i was not talking about dogs and cats! Although everyone knows they were once ''wild'' these species have been domesticated for thousands of years..............oh and pretty much on their own accord for the benefit of human and dog/cat. Look at how far they have got. We have many many pets (and huge rescue epidemics too) these days without ''introducing'' more.
> 
> ...


LOL! I know you weren't, silly! The point I was making is that everyone was going on about people shouldn't be able to keep exotics because they can't look after them properly. Yet, anyone can go out and buy a dog or a cat and not look after that properly either, so where do we draw the line? Everything that needs to be in place to stop stupid people buying exotics that don't have a clue, is.

So of course you must be talking about the small minority which are wild caught? Not the majority which are captive bred?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Hang on. Where are you going?
> 
> When I posted about it being Ok to domesticate a dog, but not an exotic......why on earth would that mean a Komodo or such? These animals can not be domesticated! _At that point _in the conversation, I was talking about domesticated exotics. The kind which I think are fine to own. Not pet DWA animals.
> 
> You can't keep a wild animal as a pet, as wild means without the care of aid of a human, which of course that animal would have.


sorry im totally confused:blushing: i never said you did say they could be domesticated you said you didnt think monkeys should be kept as pets, but in your 1st post it seemed as though you didnt see anything wrong with keeping komodo dragons,tigers & crocs in private collections as pets & this sentence in the same post didnt help lol.... Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong......

also i dont konw what you mean by domesticated exotics?

no you cant keep DWA as 'pets' unless you have a licence, but you dont need a licence to keep some wild animals


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

srhdufe said:


> They used to sell lions in Harrods





MissG said:


> Animals hunt because they have to, to stay alive. That doesn't seem like a choice to me.
> Give a carcass to a wild lion and I am quite sure it would eat that, rather than spend the time and energy hunting.
> 
> Not sure about anyone else, but I never see Lions exercising in the wild. They spend their time resting and grooming. They don't chase their food for exercise, they chase it because it moves, and if they don't, they won't catch it! LOL.
> Ok, you then might argue about obesity in captive bred animals - but I would argue that's because the animals are fed too much.


i know everyones probably seen this a thousand times but it seemed very relevant to these posts cos Christian was a captive born lion bought from Harrods & released back into the wild where he belonged

YouTube - Christian the lion Reunion, FULL LENGTH MOVIE, London Lion reunited in Africa


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> sorry im totally confused:blushing: i never said you did say they could be domesticated you said you didnt think monkeys should be kept as pets, but in your 1st post it seemed as though you didnt see anything wrong with keeping komodo dragons,tigers & crocs in private collections as pets & this sentence in the same post didnt help lol.... Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong......
> 
> also i dont konw what you mean by domesticated exotics?
> 
> no you cant keep DWA as 'pets' unless you have a licence, but you dont need a licence to keep some wild animals


Me too.
Of course you didn't, because it was me that said it! (I really hate that LOL, when people feel the need to think that everything I, or anyone else for that matter, say things, just because you do. I made that comment off my own back - so why say "I never said, that you said..." I said it, not you. Strange. )

Anyway.....

So you made assumptions really, because all I mentioned was that I know of people who keep them, as I was demonstrating that these animals are not household pets - they are animals which are untamed and live in enclosures.

By the "Just because some types of animals are newly becoming recongnised as "pets" doesn't make it wrong" post, I was trying to say that back in the day, maybe some people weren't so keen on the idea of dogs being pets and maybe in a long time to come, the some animals we are talking about, may just be household pets.

A domesticated exotic is something other that what's called as a companion animal - which lives in your house.

How can you possibly keep a wild animal? Again, wild means without the aid or care of a human. Any animal under the aid or care of a human isn't wild.


----------



## Inca's Mum (Apr 9, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i know everyones probably seen this a thousand times but it seemed very relevant to these posts cos Christian was a captive born lion bought from Harrods & released back into the wild where he belonged
> 
> YouTube - Christian the lion Reunion, FULL LENGTH MOVIE, London Lion reunited in Africa


Haven't been reading this thread, but that is so cute! hmy: :001_wub:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Me too.
> Of course you didn't, because it was me that said it! (I really hate that LOL, when people feel the need to think that everything I, or anyone else for that matter, say things, just because you do. I made that comment off my own back - so why say "I never said, that you said..." I said it, not you. Strange. )
> 
> Anyway.....
> ...


pmsl because you said this......Hang on. Where are you going? When I posted about it being Ok to domesticate a dog, but not an exotic......why on earth would that mean a Komodo or such?

some scientists believe the human/canine relationship began 15,000 - 40,000 years ago im pretty sure people in those days didnt give any thought to its domestication it most likely occured naturally & was beneficial to both species.

i think we'll just have to agree to disagree, i do think its wrong to keep wild animals as pets inspite of what you say most exotics are still wild animals, just because a meerkat(for example) lives in a house it dosent make it domesticated, its still 100% a wild animal, you could put a tiger in a house & a human care for it but its always gunna be a wild animal!

like Christian the lion in the video i posted he was born in captivity & lived in a house & had human friends, but he was still a wild animal who was given the chance of his freedom back in Africa where he belonged, instead of living his life as a prisoner.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Inca's Mum said:


> Haven't been reading this thread, but that is so cute! hmy: :001_wub:


i agree ....


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i do think its wrong to keep wild animals as pets inspite of what you say most exotics are still wild animals, just because a meerkat(for example) lives in a house it dosent make it domesticated & its still 100% a wild animal, you could put a tiger in a house & a human care for it but its always gunna be a wild animal!
> 
> like Christian the lion in the video i posted he was born in captivity & lived in a house & had human friends, but he was still a wild animal who was given the chance of his freedom instead of living his life a prisoner.


agreed Noush! :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> pmsl because you said this......Hang on. Where are you going? When I posted about it being Ok to domesticate a dog, but not an exotic......why on earth would that mean a Komodo or such?
> 
> some scientists believe the human/canine relationship began 15,000 - 40,000 years ago im pretty sure people in those days didnt give any thought to its domestication it most likely occured naturally & was beneficial to both species.
> 
> ...


Again, a wild animal is one which is not under the care or aid of a human. That is the definition. Not my definition. _The _definition.

I don't agree with any exotic animal living in a house, when it's not suitable. So this does not include reptiles, amphibians, hedgehogs, and others. That means meerkats, and armadillo's, and lions, tigers etc etc.

However, In most cases, I see no harm in these being kept in suitable enclosures (and that's not a cage, suitable being copious amounts of space) with minimal human contact.

Right at the beginning, that was the point I was trying to make. Most people on here thing these animals are living in people houses. When they aren't. They aren't treated as pets. And the ones that are, I don't agree with.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

I know the dont live in peoples house! i still dont agree with it! no matter the enclouse size the animal is not free to roam as it would be in the wild! In fact its not free to do anything it wants!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> I know the dont live in peoples house! i still dont agree with it! no matter the enclouse size the animal is not free to roam as it would be in the wild! In fact its not free to do anything it wants!


What would it want to do in the wild, that it can't in an enclosure, with copious amounts of space, and everything it needs?


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

Cant find its own mates! cant catch its own food! cant choose its own home! cant choose anything! 

You may say it doesnt "choose" to do the above but its "natrual" for them! lazing around all day and having food thrown over a fench is not natrual and never will be!

Its a cruel cruel trade taking these animals out of the wild and domesticating there off spring! Do you really belive that if the animals had a "choice" they would choose to live the way "WE" as selfish people choose for them!


----------



## shortbackandsides (Aug 28, 2008)

lets not forget that if it wasnt for human intervention some species would be extinct now


----------



## shortbackandsides (Aug 28, 2008)

intersting subject,makes you think..
wild mustangs that run free,and our horses that are stabled,shod and ridden with metal in their mouths and saddles on their backs.which would be happier??
i dont agree with wild born animals being taken and kept as pets,somehow it seems less stressful if they were born into captivity and somewhat more acceptable,especially in special breeding programs,but not in houses and inappropiate enclosures.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Cant find its own mates! cant catch its own food! cant choose its own home! cant choose anything!
> 
> You may say it doesnt "choose" to do the above but its "natrual" for them! lazing around all day and having food thrown over a fench is not natrual and never will be!
> 
> Its a cruel cruel trade taking these animals out of the wild and domesticating there off spring! Do you really belive that if the animals had a "choice" they would choose to live the way "WE" as selfish people choose for them!


You must have a zoo picture in your head. That's not what I am thinking about, and that's not how I know some of these animals live.

I have already said I don't agree with wild caught animals, so that argument goes out the window straight away.

No, I don't. I am quite sure my Guinea Pigs would get on fine foraging around the hills of Peru, and that my lizard may love to be basking on a rock around Alice Springs somewhere. But the fact is, they were born to be pets, I look after them and keep them and make sure they are as happy as they can be. They don't know any different, so I couldn't say that they would rather be doing the above, just that I know they would be just fine doing that.
The same can be said about most animals we keep.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> You must have a zoo picture in your head. That's not what I am thinking about, and that's not how I know some of these animals live..


well please put me straight then and explain to me how the ones you know are kept! do they choose there own mates? and catch there own food!? and choose where they will make a home? because if them are all no then i stick by what i said!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> well please put me straight then and explain to me how the ones you know are kept! do they choose there own mates? and catch there own food!? and choose where they will make a home? because if them are all no then i stick by what i said!


Do you really think that animals in the wild are that choosy? I understand that with birds for example, the females will go for the more colourful male etc but they aren't that fussy!
They probably will be cases where they don't get on, so be it. But generally, you put a male and female together, and if the timing is right, they'll mate.

Well the feeding of live vertebrates is a very gray area, I thought it was illegal, but it turns it it's not. However it's not something that's commonly done- so techinally, no.
However, like I have already said, a lot of the types of animals were were addressing would go for a carcass/meat etc then spend the energy hunting. Even in the wild.

An animal doesn't walk around and think "Mmmmm nah I don't like it here, the area isn't up to scratch" "No, I don't like this postcode"
If there is shelter, food and water (and of course not in the direct vicinity of predators), they'll put themselves down. If it's adaquate, it will do. Sometimes, that might not be their first, second or third choice because those are more than likely already occupied.

I think you are looking at this too much like a person. Kind of like "How would you feel" When the truth is, this is an animal and they don't think like that.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

Im not looking at it like a person! :lol: :lol: LMFAO!!!
Im trying to work out why people feel the need to take on these animals! and why you are so for it? what are the animals gaining! NOTHING! what are the people gaining MOENY!! why do people do this MONEY! do they care about the animals WELL BEING!! NO!! as long as they get there MOENY! i dont belive they give a second thought! like i said over and over any true wildlife lover would do everything in there power to see all these beautiful animals stay where they BELONG!! 
NOT try and make them into something there not and should never be!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

i only believe in animals being kept in captivity as part of captive breeding programs to preserve endangered species, hopefully where possible for release back into the wild, or in sanctuaries where wild animals who have been rescued can live out there lives.
i dont like conventional zoos where the animals are just exhibits & i certainly dont think many private collections could give them any quality of life what so ever .

i agree with the bornfree foundations ethos.....wild animals belong in the wild, not incarcerated in captivity.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Im not looking at it like a person! :lol: :lol: LMFAO!!!
> Im trying to work out why people feel the need to take on these animals! and why you are so for it? what are the animals gaining! NOTHING! what are the people gaining MOENY!! why do people do this MONEY! do they care about the animals WELL BEING!! NO!! as long as they get there MOENY! i dont belive they give a second thought! like i said over and over any true wildlife lover would do everything in there power to see all these beautiful animals stay where they BELONG!!
> NOT try and make them into something there not and should never be!


well said! x


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i only believe in animals being kept in captivity as part of captive breeding programs to preserve endangered species, hopefully where possible for release back into the wild, or in sanctuaries where wild animals who have been rescued can live out there lives.
> i dont like conventional zoos where the animals are just exhibits & i certainly dont think many private collections could give them any quality of life what so ever .
> 
> i agree with the bornfree foundations ethos.....wild animals belong in the wild, not incarcerated in captivity.


Agreed again noush! people taking them in as part of a captive breeding program are in the long run helping these animals and DO have the well being of the animals and there futhure at heart! people that take them in for the wrong reasons need a knock to the head.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Im not looking at it like a person! :lol: :lol: LMFAO!!!
> Im trying to work out why people feel the need to take on these animals! and why you are so for it? what are the animals gaining! NOTHING! what are the people gaining MOENY!! why do people do this MONEY! do they care about the animals WELL BEING!! NO!! as long as they get there MOENY! i dont belive they give a second thought! like i said over and over any true wildlife lover would do everything in there power to see all these beautiful animals stay where they BELONG!!
> NOT try and make them into something there not and should never be!


Yeah I thought that was hilarious too.

They do it because they love them. Do you have any pets? 
Everything you say above you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Yeah I thought that was hilarious too.
> 
> They do it because they love them. Do you have any pets?
> Everything you say above you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of.


Glad you found it funny to..was the funniest thing i heard all week! haha!!

yep i have pets! ...Ok you know this how? me having experience or not has nothing to do with me having views on it or not! just like you having none wouldnt! . . . i dont agree with it i think its dam right cruel and no one in there right mind that cared for wildlife would do such a stupied thing as to take them out of the wild! end of really!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Glad you found it funny to..was the funniest thing i heard all week! haha!!
> 
> yep i have pets! ...Ok you know this how? me having experience or not has nothing to do with me having views on it or not! just like you having none wouldnt! . . . i dont agree with it i think its dam right cruel and no one in there right mind that cared for wildlife would do such a stupied thing as to take them out of the wild! end of really!


Wow. You must have a very dull life then :wink5:

And what made you decide to keep pets, and why did you decide on those particular animals.breeds etc?

No. I know you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of it because of that previous post, that just clarified it.


----------



## shortbackandsides (Aug 28, 2008)

now now ladies,keep it sweet!:001_tt2:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Yeah I thought that was hilarious too.
> 
> They do it because they love them. Do you have any pets?
> Everything you say above you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of.


i dont do it because im passionate about them, i'd rather donate to charities that help preseve them in the wild.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Wow. You must have a very dull life then :wink5:
> 
> And what made you decide to keep pets, and why did you decide on those particular animals.breeds etc?
> 
> No. I know you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of it because of that previous post, that just clarified it.


I do!!  

Mum has always owned dogs i was brought up around them! the two that are mine one is a rescue i took her on because she was ill treated and the other was pick of litter! not thats got anything to do with people breeding from wild animals!  you keep going on about dogs and cats! and like i said i wouldnt have agreed with it then! but the differnce is dogs have come on a long way since then! and you may say other animals will too but the fact is i would hate to see them out of the wild!

you think you know everything on this subject!  and no one else can have views on it with out you getting all touchy about it! errmm why?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Wow. You must have a very dull life then :wink5:
> 
> And what made you decide to keep pets, and why did you decide on those particular animals.breeds etc?
> 
> No. I know you have no knowledge, understanding or experience of it because of that previous post, that just clarified it.


i feel the same as DD, the same as many organisations who dont agree with keeping wildlife as pets!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i feel the same as DD, the same as many organisations who dont agree with keeping wildlife as pets!


I think MissG is the only one that can have views on this subject and anyone that dont agree with what said says is wrong or has no experience with it? 
Shame she could explain it abit more in-stead of getting personal towards others!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> I do!!
> 
> Mum has always owned dogs i was brought up around them! the two that are mine one is a rescue i took her on because she was ill treated and the other was pick of litter! not thats got anything to do with people breeding from wild animals!  you keep going on about dogs and cats! and like i said i wouldnt have agreed with it then! but the differnce is dogs have come on a long way since then! and you may say other animals will too but the fact is i would hate to see them out of the wild!
> 
> you think you know everything on this subject!  and no one else can have views on it with out you getting all touchy about it! errmm why?


I haven't been the one getting touchy. Everyone else is with my comments. All I seem to be doing is repeating myself.

This wasn't really a matter of dogs vs exotics. It was more a case of the same exact reasons you have dogs is the same reasons why others have exotics.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> I think MissG is the only one that can have views on this subject and anyone that dont agree with what said says is wrong or has no experience with it?
> Shame she could explain it abit more in-stead of getting personal towards others!


Incorrect. Do I really have to explain myself again?

All I said was that post - ie the one about money - showed me that you didn't have a clue. Because it's not all about money.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

diffence is i havent breed to domesticated them! they have been for years! by me buying one i am not being part of a cruel trade of, off spring being taken off the mums to young for our benifits 

Whats the other reason other than money then!? dont say the love on the animals because i wont belive that in 1000000000000000000% years!
Oh and your not the only on that is having to repeat youself


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> I haven't been the one getting touchy. Everyone else is with my comments. All I seem to be doing is repeating myself.
> 
> This wasn't really a matter of dogs vs exotics. It was more a case of the same exact reasons you have dogs is the same reasons why others have exotics.


again you miss the point, dogs are domesticated they like the companionship of man & visa versa....animals kept say in private collections can never live fullfilled lives, its a one way relationship, its down to human selfishness.

you cant compare keeping a non domesticated animal to keeping a domesticated one


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> diffence is i havent breed to domesticated them! they have been for years! by me buying one i am not being part of a cruel trade of off spring being taken off the mums to young for our benifits


But exotic pets have been domesticated for years too.

I don't see what's so cruel either about breeding animals properly...... Most are.
I already mentioned about the black market, and me not liking that.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> But exotic pets have been domesticated for years too.
> 
> I don't see what's so cruel either about breeding animals properly...... Most are.
> I already mentioned about the black market, and me not liking that.


what do you class as being bred properly then! 
Dogs have been domesticated 1000s of years!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> But exotic pets have been domesticated for years too.
> 
> I don't see what's so cruel either about breeding animals properly...... Most are.
> I already mentioned about the black market, and me not liking that.


which exotics are domesticated?


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> diffence is i havent breed to domesticated them! they have been for years! by me buying one i am not being part of a cruel trade of, off spring being taken off the mums to young for our benifits
> 
> Whats the other reason other than money then!? dont say the love on the animals because i wont belive that in 1000000000000000000% years!
> Oh and your not the only on that is having to repeat youself


Yep... The love of the animals. Why else would a person spend thousands of pounds creating the proper environment, getting vetted and then thousands of pounds buying the animals?

Passion. That's what.

Now, again I already said that this isn't the case all the time, but most people who keep exotics do so properly. That's not properly just to exotic keepers standards, that's properly to the animals standards. The only people who think otherwise are non exotic animal people. Probably just simply because they don't understand. But that's nothing a little research couldn't change.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> what do you class as being bred properly then!
> Dogs have been domesticated 1000s of years!


Ie. not farmed.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> which exotics are domesticated?


Crikey, every animal I own....
Reptiles, Amphbians, Inverts, even Guinea Pigs and Rats. Birds and some mammals.

Anything that isn't a dog or a cat.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

im sure they would make more money back! you love wildlife yes? then please do explain why you think its alright to take them out the wild! im still not understanding why some one that loved wildlife would want them any other way!  feel free to explain.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> im sure they would make more money back! you love wildlife yes? then please do explain why you think its alright to take them out the wild! im still not understanding why some one that loved wildlife would want them any other way!  feel free to explain.


Well as already stated in my previous posts, I don't condone wild caught animals.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> Crikey, every animal I own....
> Reptiles, Amphbians, Inverts, even Guinea Pigs and Rats. Birds and some mammals.
> 
> Anything that isn't a dog or a cat.


i can only see 2 domesticated animals on your list the GP & presuming its a fancy one the rat

what other mammals?


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i can only see 2 domesticated animals on your list the GP & presuming its a fancy one the rat
> 
> what other mammals?


They are all domesticated - i.e live in my house.

Hedgehogs, hamsters, Gerbils, Mice, lemmings, Ferrets, skunks all sorts.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> They are all domesticated - i.e live in my house.
> 
> Hedgehogs, hamsters, Gerbils, Mice, lemmings, Ferrets, skunks all sorts.


hedgehog,lemmings i dont think whether they live in a house this would make them domesticated, skunk is a bit of a grey area for me cos i know many of their ancestors come from fur farms & coat mutations have occured, so i dont know enough about them to give an opinion.

gerbils,mice,hamsters & ferrets are domesticated.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> hedgehog,lemmings i dont think whether they live in a house this would make them domesticated, skunk is a bit of a grey area for me cos i know many of their ancestors come from fur farms & coat mutations have occured, so i dont know enough about them to give an opinion.
> 
> gerbils,mice,hamsters & ferrets are domesticated.


So what else could they be? Wild LOL! Please don't make me type it again? Domestic means home/house.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

The ones YOU have may be domesticaed! but that doesnt mean as a species they are!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> The ones YOU have may be domesticaed! but that doesnt mean as a species they are!


It doesn't make it wrong to have an animal as a pet, that exists in the wild.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MissG said:


> So what else could they be? Wild LOL! Please don't make me type it again? Domestic means home/house.


ive copied & pasted this, it explains it much better than me

Exotic animals, by definition, are not domesticated...Honey bears, sugar gliders, corn snakes, green iguanas, black panthers, rosy boas, flying squirrels, bearded dragons, veiled chameleons, spotted pythons, leopard geckos, even poison dart frogs these are just some of the exotic animals people sell as pets. It may be easy to buy an exotic animal, but it is not a good idea. It is bad for the animals, bad for us and bad for the environment. And although it may be borderline legal to sell some of these animals, in many places it is illegal to buy them.

It's Bad for the Animals
Experts believe that it took at least five thousand years, and perhaps longer than ten thousand years, for wolves to evolve into dogs. So, there are thousands of years of difference between a wild and a domestic animal. Domesticated animals like dogs and cats don't do well without people, and wild and exotic animals don't do well with people.

so whether you keep a lion or a lemming in your house its not going to make it a domesticated animal


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

To me it does! 


MissG said:


> It doesn't make it wrong to have an animal as a pet, that exists in the wild.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> To me it does!


Well that's fine. It's only an opinion.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> ive copied & pasted this, it explains it much better than me
> 
> Exotic animals, by definition, are not domesticated...Honey bears, sugar gliders, corn snakes, green iguanas, black panthers, rosy boas, flying squirrels, bearded dragons, veiled chameleons, spotted pythons, leopard geckos, even poison dart frogs these are just some of the exotic animals people sell as pets. It may be easy to buy an exotic animal, but it is not a good idea. It is bad for the animals, bad for us and bad for the environment. And although it may be borderline legal to sell some of these animals, in many places it is illegal to buy them.
> 
> ...


hehe!!!! EXCELLENT!! post! :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> To me it does!


Me too DD! x


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> ive copied & pasted this, it explains it much better than me
> 
> Exotic animals, by definition, are not domesticated...Honey bears, sugar gliders, corn snakes, green iguanas, black panthers, rosy boas, flying squirrels, bearded dragons, veiled chameleons, spotted pythons, leopard geckos, even poison dart frogs these are just some of the exotic animals people sell as pets. It may be easy to buy an exotic animal, but it is not a good idea. It is bad for the animals, bad for us and bad for the environment. And although it may be borderline legal to sell some of these animals, in many places it is illegal to buy them.
> 
> ...


LOL. And I could copy and paste the same thing, but saying the opposite from a pro exotic keepers site too.
I bet that was from some sort of Peta type site, the kind who would rather see a dog dead, than be a pet.
Hardly a very balanced opinion is it?

Domestic means house/home. It really is that simple.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Mmmm, by this arguement only dogs and cats that are free to roam should be kept as pets.
That shortens this forum by a fair bit!!
I often wonder why nobody campaigns for the poor little 'domesticated' beasties? Take hamsters for example. Have no reason to be kept as pets, too small to eat, dont have a symbiotic relationship with man. Also are timid, shy solitary animals in their native homes. You can say they have been domesticated for years but when did they stop becoming exotic and start becoming acceptable?
Just contemplating, not sure I have an opinion at all!!


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Of course the pro exotic people will say the opposite! They are the ones keeping wild animals! So they will always try and make it ''right'' to be able to keep them.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> Of course the pro exotic people will say the opposite! They are the ones keeping wild animals! So they will always try and make it ''right'' to be able to keep them.


Absolutely they would. (Not to try and make it right though) So why would I copy and paste what they have to say? That wouldn't be a fair argument would it.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> Of course the pro exotic people will say the opposite! They are the ones keeping wild animals! So they will always try and make it ''right'' to be able to keep them.


Exactly and just because people that are all for it say the opposite does NOT make it right! 
and people say i dont agree with them being taken out the wild but they will still keep them as pets if there brought up out of the "wild" to me its just the same because some where down the line the animals WILL have been took straight out of the wild to be bred from!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Absolutely they would. (Not to try and make it right though) So why would I copy and paste what they have to say? That wouldn't be a fair argument would it.


feel free to show us what they say..


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> So what else could they be? Wild LOL! Please don't make me type it again? Domestic means home/house.


u use the word domestic in the wong context here i believe....

...domestication means to adopt or make fit for domestic use or life...

for u having to put a reptile into a tank with a "fake" desert means that this animal is in need of its natural habitat and not the domestic life  i hope that makes sense somehow...

exotic also stands for strange or unusuall.... that would include primates, crocodiles, wolfs, tigers and this sort under term of exotics....


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> u use the word domestic in the wong context here i believe....
> 
> ...domestication means to adopt or make fit for domestic use or life...
> 
> ...


No it doesn't. He is not in need of anything I don't already provide for him.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> feel free to show us what they say..


I am quite sure it won't take you long to find online. Again......I can voice my own opinion - to just show you someone else's wouldn't be fair.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

It makes perfect sense too me!!!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> I am quite sure it won't take you long to find online. Again......I can voice my own opinion - to just show you someone else's wouldn't be fair.


Noush was only backing up what she had said..and there nothing un-fair about it! and i cant actually be bothered to search the net for a lot of gobbly about how its ok to keep wild animals as pets!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

why do you need to make the place reptile's are kept (when in captivity) feel and look like it would in the wild if there that adapted to the domestic life! I think thats what Natik was getting at 
and imo a blimmin brilliant point


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Noush was only backing up what she had said..and there nothing un-fair about it! and i cant actually be bothered to search the net for a lot of gobbly about how its ok to keep wild animals as pets!


Ok, and I understand why she did it. I on the other hand, don't feel the need to.

Wild animals can't be kept as pets. A wild animal is one which is not under the care or aid of a human.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> Of course the pro exotic people will say the opposite! They are the ones keeping wild animals! So they will always try and make it ''right'' to be able to keep them.


exactly

no it wasnt taken from peta type site actually, its the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, they rescue & rehome hundreds of dogs...heres one case but theres loads on their website.......ASPCA | Lyles, TennesseeâJune 2008


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> why do you need to make the place they stay feel and look like it would in the wild if there that adapted to the domestic life! I think thats what Natik was getting at
> and imo a blimmin brilliant point


Because keeping him in anything else would be cruel....wouldn't it?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Natik said:


> u use the word domestic in the wong context here i believe....
> 
> ...domestication means to adopt or make fit for domestic use or life...
> 
> ...


Great post! x


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> No it doesn't. He is not in need of anything I don't already provide for him.


u misundertood me there, i didnt say u dont provide those things for him.... maybe reread the post


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Ok, and I understand why she did it. I on the other hand, don't feel the need to.
> 
> Wild animals can't be kept as pets. A wild animal is one which is not under the care or aid of a human.


you use wild in the wrong term! so the WILD animals that are under our care at work when being treated are no longer wild until released because there under aid of a human!! haha!!! thats funny!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> u misundertood me there, i didnt say u dont provide those things for him.... maybe reread the post


You said

this animal is in need of its natural habitat

He doesn't need his natural habitat. Simply because what I give him is all he needs.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> you use wild in the wrong term! so the WILD animals that are under our care at work when being treated are no longer wild until released because there under aid of a human!! haha!!! thats funny!


Yeah dictionary's are funny!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Because keeping him in anything else would be cruel....wouldn't it?


Yes it would! but then imo keeping them at all is cruel! i just dont understand if there that adapted to being in captivity why they would need there surrondings to be the same as it would be in the wild! simple there not as adapted as you think!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Noush was only backing up what she had said..and there nothing un-fair about it! and i cant actually be bothered to search the net for a lot of gobbly about how its ok to keep wild animals as pets!


pmsl thanks DD, yes i didnt think my own explanations were understood plus im burning the tea! lol


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> Yes it would! but then imo keeping them at all is cruel! i just dont understand if there that adapted to being in captivity why they would need there surrondings to be the same as it would be in the wild! simple there not as adapted as you think!


Because they are cold blooded maybe?

I don't think they are adapted to live in captivity. Right at the beginning I said they didn't need to adapt, because we provide everything they need for them.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> pmsl thanks DD, yes i didnt think my own explanations were understood plus im burning the tea! lol


lmfao! go to your tea! mind you at this rate you will have another 10+ pages to read when you get back! :001_tt2:


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Ok, and I understand why she did it. I on the other hand, don't feel the need to.
> 
> Wild animals can't be kept as pets. A wild animal is one which is not under the care or aid of a human.


u also use the term wild in the wrong context....

WILD....living in a state of nature; not tamed or domesticated: a wild animal; wild geese.

Exotics cant be tamed, a boa will strangle if given the opurtinity, a komodor will bite if given the opurtinity etc etc....

U fake the state of nature by providing fake deserts for instance....

thats not domesticated......


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Because they are cold blooded maybe?
> 
> I don't think they are adapted to live in captivity. Right at the beginning I said they didn't need to adapt, because we provide everything they need for them.


So because you can give them what they need its aright to keep them! although the animal will be gaining nothing from it! why not leave them were they are!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> u also use the term wild in the wrong context....
> 
> WILD....living in a state of nature; not tamed or domesticated: a wild animal; wild geese.
> 
> ...


All of my exotic animals are tame. Crikey, if they weren't I would get in a lot of trouble at schools!


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Because they are cold blooded maybe?
> 
> I don't think they are adapted to live in captivity. Right at the beginning I said they didn't need to adapt, because we provide everything they need for them.


but when they are domesticated then u wouldnt need u to provide any extraordinary surrounding such as a fake desert


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> So because you can give them what they need its aright to keep them! although the animal will be gaining nothing from it! why not leave them were they are!


Yes. Because I have a passion for exotics. And I use him to express my passions to children. I use him and all my animals to teach children all about them.
If I left him where he was, he would just be sat at the breeders house..... so he might aswel be sat at mine.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> All of my exotic animals are tame. Crikey, if they weren't I would get in a lot of trouble at schools!


im sure u take precautions and dont just let ur animals roam free with the kids...


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> but when they are domesticated then u wouldnt need u to provide any extraordinary surrounding such as a fake desert


Unless I wanted him to die of course.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Yes. Because I have a passion for exotics. And I use him to express my passions to children. I use him and all my animals to teach children all about them.
> If I left him where he was, he would just be sat at the breeders house..... so he might aswel be sat at mine.


when i say leave where they are i did not mean the breeders house i ment the wild!
so you have him for your own benifit! ok! 
I have a passion for deers not that i would want them any where other than the wild!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> im sure u take precautions and dont just let ur animals roam free with the kids...


Of course not, but if they weren't tame, they would get bitten.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Unless I wanted him to die of course.


exactly.... thats way they are not domesticated....


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> when i say leave where they are i did not mean the breeders house i ment the wild!
> so you have him for your own benifit! ok!


He is captive bred, not wild caught. Just like his countless generations before were.

Yes I do. Just like people keep companion animals (and you can save the put dogs are different bla bla bla - we have dogs because we want to. We choose the breed because we like the look, or the work it does for us)

But I also use him to educate children - to stop the irresponsible keeping of exotics.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Of course not, but if they weren't tame, they would get bitten.


i have seen shows with people clapping alligators and tigers etc ...would u class them as a domesticated and tame?

Its all about taking precautions and im sure if u wouldnt they would bite if felt threatend for instance if given the chance .... but im pretty sure u take away this "chance" from them and class them as "tame" ....


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> He is captive bred, not wild caught. Just like his countless generations before were.
> 
> Yes I do. Just like people keep companion animals (and you can save the put dogs are different bla bla bla - we have dogs because we want to. We choose the breed because we like the look, or the work it does for us)
> 
> But I also use him to educate children - to stop the irresponsible keeping of exotics.


ALL keepings of exotics is irresponsible!  ohh and dogs are different! we dont have to treat them as they would have been 1000s of years ago in the wild! because they are domesticated! (and better for it)


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> exactly.... thats way they are not domesticated....


No, it's because they are cold blooded.....

Ok, so he can't roam around my house - but he can happily live in my house if I provide for him what he needs.

Are you guys seriously having a go....because I look after my animals properly???? There are far more worsr things going on in this life. I ahve already mentioned that I don't agree with the black market, that I don't agree with wild caught and I don't agree with people buying exotics on impulse or for status.

If I was treating my animals badly, making them suffer etc etc I can understand your contributions to this thread.

But instead, you just don't agree with the keeping of exotics. Is that really worth 20+ pages when I am doing absolutely nothing wrong?


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> i have seen shows with people clapping alligators and tigers etc ...would u class them as a domesticated and tame?
> 
> Its all about taking precautions and im sure if u wouldnt they would bite if felt threatend for instance if given the chance .... but im pretty sure u take away this "chance" from them and class them as "tame" ....


That's a different kettle of fish really. Definetley not domesicated, unless they live in someones house - but tame, no I wouldn't even say that.

Well I wouldn't even let them feel threatened, so thus the chance of biting is almost elliminated.


----------



## LittleFluff (Jun 5, 2008)

Just got back from the South Lakes wild animal park and then saw this thread and have to say that although all the animals look so cute and lovely, a quick glimpse of their teeth here and there is a reminder that they can be unpredictable and dangerous and putting them in a domesticated home could be a potential disaster! I think wild animals should be left in the wild (e.g. lions, meerkats etc) just because it has everything they need and it's their home. 

I suppose there is a boundary issue - where do you draw the line at which wild animal is acceptable? etc but just watching the animals today, and although I know is a 'false home' as such as it's not the wild wild, they still look so happy and content and having that interaction with other species and plenty of their own species helps enrich their lives and this is just something that a domestic home cannot offer it's impractical. 

Personally I love to see wild animals out in the wild, enjoying their life and living free, dogs and cats have been through so many years of domestication that it's acceptable. I reckon wild animal and safari parks are the next best thing for animals on the verge of extinction etc but surely nothing compares to seeing one happy and content in their natural habitat? 

I also think there are so many dogs, cats and small pets (and the others) that are in rescues waiting for loving homes without adding more and more species to the lists, just seems such a shame


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

But to some people you are doing something wrong! and how can you say you dont agree with wild caught when some where down the line the animals you own WOULD have come from animals that WERE wild caught!


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

LittleFluff said:


> Just got back from the South Lakes wild animal park and then saw this thread and have to say that although all the animals look so cute and lovely, a quick glimpse of their teeth here and there is a reminder that they can be unpredictable and dangerous and putting them in a domesticated home could be a potential disaster! I think wild animals should be left in the wild (e.g. lions, meerkats etc) just because it has everything they need and it's their home.
> 
> I suppose there is a boundary issue - where do you draw the line at which wild animal is acceptable? etc but just watching the animals today, and although I know is a 'false home' as such as it's not the wild wild, they still look so happy and content and having that interaction with other species and plenty of their own species helps enrich their lives and this is just something that a domestic home cannot offer it's impractical.
> 
> ...


That's a well written post.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> But to some people you are doing something wrong! and how can you say you dont agree with wild caught when some where down the line the animals you own WOULD have come from animals that WERE wild caught!


Well opinions don't really mean much, I am talking about doing nothing wrong i.e breaking the law. If it was cruel to keep the pets I do, I wouldn't because it would be against the law.
Some where down the line as in many years ago? That's a bit silly.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> No, it's because they are cold blooded.....
> 
> Ok, so he can't roam around my house - but he can happily live in my house if I provide for him what he needs.
> 
> ...


Noone is having a go .... i am just reading ur post and adding my way of understanding.... u used the word domesticated in associaten with wild animals which is not right and i just felt anyone reading it should know the other side of thinking of it....

Anyway....a cold blooded lizard for instance means that its not even suitable to live in this country and then u still would class it as domesticated?? .... lol


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Well opinions don't really mean much, I am talking about doing nothing wrong i.e breaking the law. If it was cruel to keep the pets I do, I wouldn't because it would be against the law.
> Some where down the line as in many years ago? That's a bit silly.


just to point out... breeding from a bitch every season is cruel but its not against the law to do so, still doesnt make it right....


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> Noone is having a go .... i am just reading ur post and adding my way of understanding.... u used the word domesticated in associaten with wild animals which is not right and i just felt anyone reading it should know the other side of thinking of it....
> 
> Anyway....a cold blooded lizard for instance means that its not even suitable to live in this country and then u still would class it as domesticated?? .... lol


It's domesticated because it lives in my house. Domestic means house/home.

As long as he has what he needs, he can live in any country, because we are lucky enough to have access to the technology that he needs.


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> just to point out... breeding from a bitch every season is cruel but its not against the law to do so, still doesnt make it right....


Are you serious?


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

I'm going to ask a very simple question, how many private hobbyists keep Lions and Komodo Dragons? 

This argument is somewhat flawed. Let's take Bearded dragons as an example, these animals require calcium and UVB light of the correct intensity to prevent the development of metabolic bone disease. 

If these reptiles are provided with these two things along and other necessary requirements are met such as a correct temperature gradient within the enclosure then surely they can thrive just as they would in the wild? Many species of reptiles are bred in huge numbers on a yearly basis, these animals wouldn't be able to breed if they weren't thriving.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> Well opinions don't really mean much, I am talking about doing nothing wrong i.e breaking the law. If it was cruel to keep the pets I do, I wouldn't because it would be against the law.
> Some where down the line as in many years ago? That's a bit silly.


peoples opinions dont mean much! that says it all for me! 
ok so you not breaking the law..but again that still doesnt make it right for the ANIMAL! you have already said yourself you keep your animals for YOUR benifit! to me thats selfish! but hey opinions mean nothing to you!
How is that silly its FACT and by you saying you dont agree with wild caughts but then have animals that are from wild caughts weather it bee the first generation or the last its double standards.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> It's domesticated because it lives in my house. Domestic means house/home.
> 
> As long as he has what he needs, he can live in any country, because we are lucky enough to have access to the technology that he needs.


domestic means house and domestication means to adopt or make fit for domestic use or life ... two different things IMO!!!!

oh, so its the technology which keeps him basiclly alive then? Not because he is domesticated?


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

Natik said:


> just to point out... breeding from a bitch every season is cruel but its not against the law to do so, still doesnt make it right....


Exactly!


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Are you serious?


.........yes


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

DevilDogz said:


> peoples opinions dont mean much! that says it all for me!
> ok so you not breaking the law..but again that still doesnt make it right for the ANIMAL! you have already said yourself you keep your animals for YOUR benifit! to me thats selfish! but hey opinions mean nothing to you!
> How is that silly its FACT and by you saying you dont agree with wild caughts but then have animals that are from wild caughts weather it bee the first generation or the last its double standards.


You really are clutching at straws aren't you?

Does my opinion matter to you? No.

Whether you think so or not, I am not causing any unnecessary pain or suffering to my animals. If you think I am just by keeping them as a pet, then it's you with the problem.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

I'll be in my grave before this argument ends....


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> .........yes


Ok.

So. Cruel is to cause unnecessary pain or suffering. Of course to bred from a bitch every season would be this.

However, keeping exotics responsibly isn't.

Obviously the law is just a tad bit out of date there - and anyone with half a brain would know that.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

MissG said:


> You really are clutching at straws aren't you?
> 
> Does my opinion matter to you? No.
> 
> Whether you think so or not, I am not causing any unnecessary pain or suffering to my animals. If you think I am just by keeping them as a pet, then it's you with the problem.


NO im not! That last post was stating facts! you say one thing but then you are against that by having animals that WILL some where down the line have come from wild caught! thats not hard to understand!

yes your opinion does matter to me! because i like to understand what makes people keep these animals ect!

You are right i have a problem with it! because i am a true wildlife lover!


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

MissG said:


> Ok.
> 
> So. Cruel is to cause unnecessary pain or suffering. Of course to bred from a bitch every season would be this.
> 
> ...


i was just making a fair point to ur post....

U can keep a wild caught animals responsibly too....providing it with all it needs and have as little as possible contact with it....

But its not about what u can provide and what u can give it...its about where it belongs and where it should be.... and thats not someones livingroom or garden....


----------



## MissG (Apr 18, 2008)

Natik said:


> i was just making a fair point to ur post....
> 
> U can keep a wild caught animals responsibly too....providing it with all it needs and have as little as possible contact with it....
> 
> *But its not about what u can provide and what u can give it...its about where it belongs and where it should be.... and thats not someones livingroom or garden...*.


I agree with this, to a certain extent. I think that statement is animal dependant.

Anyway, Noushka hasn't been on yet, so I imagine that when she gets back she will have something to say. 
But, I'm seriously done. There is nothing more but repetitive posts going on.

I have received quite a few PM's on this, it's a shame really that they don't feel brave enough to post on here.

I am quite sure this thread has made for good reading though, and that's what matters.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2009)

it is a shame people cant come on but then thats there choice! maybe they dont know enough or feel they know enough to put it on here! 
Yes noushka will have something to say because she is a true wildlife lover! 

I wasnt aware the thread was just for good reading!  for me its about hearing the other side! but like you said others views mean nothing to you.


----------



## 3 red dogs (May 17, 2008)

I think after 30 pages of every ones point of view, we have exhausted this thread to its death. 
THREAD CLOSED


----------

