|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 6, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The definition of PET I use has nothing to do with domestication. It is a one way street, pet is an animal a human loves/cherished/keeps, regardless of if the animal/pet returns that love, an animal not used to make money with, aniaml that doesn't have to work for living.
I would argue, rather successfully, that a wild caught turtle (and many other reptiles) makes a much nicer and safer pet than a domesticated bull or horse.
So pet has nothing to do with domestication.
Z
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pet
pet 1 (p t)
n.
1. An animal kept for amusement or companionship.
2. An object of the affections.
3. A person especially loved or indulged; a favorite: the teacher's pet.
adj.
1. Kept as a pet: a pet cat.
2.
a. Particularly cherished or indulged: a pet grandchild.
b. Expressing or showing affection: a pet name.
3. Being a favorite: a pet topic.
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 6, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
to bring this back on venomous topic, I am just curious, Todd, what kind of work do you do with venomous snakes?
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on November 6, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm glad to see the country had enough sense this time to realize we should vote not based on wedge issues, but on the fact that conservative and right-wing leadership has done more damage in the past 8 years than we've seen in a long time. That is why Obama, the nation's first minority president, was elected. And I believe he'll be an excellent one at that.
As for his stances on keeping whatever kinds of animals as pets - well, fortunately the president doesn't make laws. He does set the tone for government and can both directly and indirectly influence laws (see: W), but he doesn't write up and sign anything into law himself without it passing congressional muster. I believe Obama to be a very reasonable, logical, immensely intelligent human being who wouldn't blindly support some kind of divisive legislation (like some others I can name). In that regard, we as a pet community should try, for a change, to unite and make sure our voices are heard - as reasonable human beings and not ranting lunatics.
What won't work is for the right-wingers among us to continue predicting doom and gloom for us as a nation because Obama won. Oh boohoo, your guy lost this time, get over it. It's time to move on and try to start healing this country of many of its ills.
With all this being said, I personally wouldn't mind seeing some tougher legislation in regards to animal keeping. There are, simply put, too many incompetent people out there keeping animals they shouldn't, often at the expense of the animals and sometimes themselves. I may be mistaking it, but Z I haven't seen you advocate much of anything but absolute freedom to keep whatever anyone wants. If I'm incorrect here, then I just haven't seen it or am not remembering correctly and I apologize. In this situation, free reign is not the proper solution. What would really be best would be a country-wide resolution mandating certain requirements for keeping dangerous animals, but of course that's just wishful thinking.
So maybe instead of fear and paranoia over this week's election, you should try to see the bright side of things. In a move that shocked many around the world, we proved that after only 7 years since 9/11, we can willingly elect the nation's first minority president with the middle name Hussein. America can be a surprising country sometimes, and I have to admit I'm now a little more proud of her than I have been of late. We've shown real promise for progress, and the continuous backlash since Tuesday, while not surprising, will just hamper our improvement as a country.
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 6, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Chance wrote:<< but Z I
haven't seen you advocate much of anything but absolute freedom to keep whatever
anyone wants.>>
Chance, I had a tough day and you just finished me off, u r killing me. Have you paid attention to the incidents lately, drug/exotic animal busts, aka, existing laws were broken, injuries/fatalities, where current industry protocols or laws were broken…how will more regulation force people to do anything if many current accidents happen because people are not following laws we already have? U mean answer to everything is to make more laws when current ones are not being followed or enforced?
I believe good people do the right thing no matter what, and criminals are criminals because THEY DO NOT CARE FOR LAWS.
Sorry, I dealt with too many idiots today in real life regarding animals, so I am not even trying to be polite.
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 6, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<,What won't work is for the right-wingers among us to continue predicting doom and gloom for us as a nation because Obama won. >>
PS: Chance , make that libertarian right winger, after Carter came many years of economic Republican prosperity, (god bless Reagan and I am not even religious), so we have something to look forward after 4 years of socialist hell I personally escaped from a communist Czechoslovakia.
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on November 7, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
So am I understanding correctly then Z, that you do NOT want any laws restricting who is able to keep dangerous animals? I'm just trying to clarify. If so, I have to say I completely disagree. I mean yeah, people are going to still do stupid things like raising tigers in apartments or keeping bears in 10x10 dog kennels, but at least we could address it country wide. Just because people still murder other people, that doesn't mean we should decriminalize murder since it's going to happen anyway (I know, extreme example but still relevant).
I think a large part of the reason that current laws are not being enforced is because we, as a group of people, don't do enough self-policing within our own ranks. Go to any reptile or exotic animal show and not only will you find A. lots of illegal animals and B. lots of illegal sales (ex: to people that are from an illegal state and fully plan to transport the critter back there), but you also see a lot animals in deplorable conditions and potentially dangerous animals sold to people who shouldn't have children, much less pets.
Ex: I went to an exotic animal sale in OK a few years ago. It was in June, and it was hot! There were numerous chickens, swans, peafowl, etc. lined up in cages outside either directly in the sun or in the shade. A number were already dead, and many were showing signs of heat fatigue. Inside, in the "exotics" room, there were sugar gliders stuffed into tiny cages with no cover, during the day mind you, a number of which had discolored hair from the filth in which they had presumably been living. Then to really top it off, there was a black bear cub in a dog kennel and some kids were standing around with a cattle prod poking at it while the thing was screaming. It was when I saw that that I had to leave. These "animal lovers" were obviously only there for a quick buck or to acquire a new critter, and I didn't once hear any concerns about the conditions in which they were being kept.
So my point is, I personally wouldn't mind seeing events like that outlawed. It was ridiculous. Sure people are still going to try to have them, but at least then it would have to be under the table and there could be legal consequences. The same goes for idiots who try to raise tigers and lions in apartment buildings or keep these apex predators in tiny cages. Same with primates - I've seen more obviously depressed monkeys at little roadside zoos or in private hands in terrible conditions than I care to remember.
But just to make sure I understand your position - you don't think anything should be done about these situations? Simply because people are still going to do it anyway? But don't you think it would at least be nice to have legal ramifications for those who abuse animals? Again, just clarifying.
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by toddg on November 7, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What kind of work do I do with venomous snakes? Farm work actually, I use them for plowing my fields to grow huggable trees. Honestly, I'm facing a bit of a dilemma. Vipers, on one hand fit the plow harness-thingy well as their mid body is thicker than their necks however, they’re so damn slow I can’t ever get any work done! Elapids on the other hand, have the ideal temperament, constantly moving forward, finding every nook and cranny, yet they keep slithering right out of that plow harness. And sea snakes! Don’t get me started! They just flop around like fish out of water! I use to employ a couple of atractaspids at my fruit stand but as it turns out, some folks are loath to purchase apples from serpents. I guess their still a little bitter about that whole Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden thing.
Seriously though, I live in Ca. where the keeping venomous is illegal unless properly permitted. And permits here are practically impossible to obtain. So I choose to keep large constrictors, which are legal. If however my state does choose to enact a ban on large constrictors, I will reluctantly comply.
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 7, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Chance, Toddg can you give me sizes/measurements of your snakes and corresponding enclosure dimensions?
yes, i am going somewhere with this, and I will explain myself when u give me these facts and answer your questuins regardign laws.
thanks
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on November 7, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sure, let's see... I have a baby indigo snake in a 2' long slant-front Neodesha, forgive me that I don't know the exact dimensions. The snake is approximately 18" in length. I have a young king ratsnake that is about 24" in length and she's in a 3' x 2' enclosure. I have an adult spotted python, roughly the same length as the king rat in the same size enclosure. I also have two adult carpet pythons, one that is about 5' and one that is 5.5', and they're both in enclosures measure 4'x2'.
I believe I know where you're going with this and I'll see if I can cut you off at the pass, as it were. If you're trying to draw a parallel about keeping snakes in 'apparently' cramped enclosures vs. keeping primates or large cats in small enclosures, there is no comparison. Snakes are, by nature, secretive animals and rarely move about their environments in the open. In fact, many species may spend weeks or even months in the exact same spot. Other animals like primates and large cats, OTOH, have large home ranges which few private keepers could ever hope to emulate.
Now before you jump on me for being anti-exotics or AR as you like to so often throw around the term, let me state: I am not against people keeping exotic and even dangerous animals. I am against incompetent people keeping such animals, however, and would like to see some kind of legislation on a national level (not a ban!) addressing the situation. I would like to see strict regulations requiring people selling animals in auction-type environments, and even herp shows, that demand a certain amount of respect be due to the animals in terms of container size and quality, not to mention care.
Anyway, I'm curious to see what kind of parallel you'll draw with the enclosure size vs. snake size request.
|
| |
|
RE: Obama admits he supports exotic animal bans
|
Reply
|
|
by toddg on November 7, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Currently: 16’ retic, 12’ rock, 8.5’ red tail, and 9’ Indian are all in individual 6’x 3’x 18” visions with helix thermostats and ceramic heating elements. A 7’ Ceylonese is in a 2’x 2’x 4’ particle board with melamine surface. A 6’ yellow anaconda in an approximately 200 gal. aquarium and a dwarf green anaconda (no more than 3’ at ten years of age and yes she eats just fine, just won’t grow) in a small vision dimensions of which escape me at the moment.
Chance is correct, on many occasions in the past I’ve given various constrictors the run of the house and I find that invariably they always seem to find a much more confining space than their current cages. I always assumed they were just trying to find a spot that was safe from………… well me. Which is why I try to handle them as little as possible. The ONLY thing I require from my snakes as that they BE snakes.
I guess it’s a trade off as I could never give my animals the size and space I would like, but then again, they are free from predation, parasites, and starvation. Also, they get free medical and have a great dental plan. Ultimately though my animals didn’t choose captivity over the living free, I made that choice for them.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
