One of the reasons I'm against reptiles as pets

[HowietheGreat]

I was just about to touch upon the need of many people to personify their pets. I do it myself when I'm joking, but in a serious evaluation of my pets or any pet for that matter, there is a clear line between how they act or react, and my interruptation of it. I find it disturbing that you question the ability (Alusdra) of good pet ownership based upon a animals ability to show affection. Every living creature that we take into our possession should have the best quality of life possible, regardless of their abilty to show love or affection. To question their treatment based upon their capacity is concerning-and rather narcasstic. Do you have to get something out of it (love and affection) from a animal to care for it? Agreed. Mating is instinctual in many creatures and it hardly consitutes a bond. I think Suasan is correct. Release these animals back into their natural (hypothetically of course) habitat and they are not going to return. Just because we can own certain animals does not at all mean we should.

[envisionary333]

Originally Posted by John4216

Along those same lines people tend to blur things together. The cognitive abilities of say an Elephant are much different than that of a mouse. Animals are often "hard wired" to do things and really have no control over the matter (i.e. breeding) like people do. Higher functioning animals display higher levels of ability. Look at GP's for example. Social herd animals but with limited cognitive abilities. Pretty much the live for and in the moment. No or limited abstract concepts, no concepts of "tomorrow" or the future. Animals like this tend to be hard wired to be this way and to avoid all other animals not of their species. That does not mean they don't feel things however or that they do not think, it is just different than people.

Thank you for this very needed analysis. I find the arguments that go on over whether animals "think" or "have feelings" or "feel love" tend to become polarized within black or white, or muddled in the gray of human interpretation. In nature, there are so many more varieties, gradients of difference in our abilities to perceive and respond to the world, that "yes" or "no" answers usually don't do the trick. It is not that animals don't feel or think, and humans do. A guinea pig is an animal, just as a chimpanzee, just as a human... We have different brain structures and evolutionary niches and social roles, we perceive and think and feel in different ways. Sometimes I think it's best to try to understand animals not in ways they compare to humans, but just as they are. Terms like "feelings" and "thoughts" and "love" are so broad and open to interpretation, that constructing rigid arguments around them tends to create conflict. Unless you define them in a very specific way for what you are arguing, I think they are rather meaningless.

[VoodooJoint]

Originally Posted by HowietheGreat

I find it disturbing that you question the ability (Alusdra) of good pet ownership based upon a animals ability to show affection.

No one is questioning Alustdra's pet care and husbandry. The entire idea/concept of owning wild animals is being questioned.

I firmly believe that for the most part reptiles are ill kept and suffer horribly. They are not "average Joe" pets and should not be so readily available to people. Proper, meaningful licensing both to own and breed should be in place (at the very least).

I applaud those who spend the time and money to truly care for reptiles properly. I have a hard time understanding why people like that would think that proper licensing was a bad thing. It would protect the type of animal they hold so dear.

As it is small reptiles, including; leopard geckos, iguanas, snakes, etc, are given away by the hundreds (perhaps thousands) every year as prizes in carnivals. Most do not make it to their new "homes" alive and the majority of the rest will die in misery due to ignorance and neglect.

If the responsible people want to continue to keep their reptiles as pets then they need to take charge and get some laws changed to protect these animals. If the reptile enthusiasts don't do it then they are leaving it in the hands of people like me that would rather see ALL reptiles banned from common ownership to save the vast multitudes that are abused, used and suffering. I guess it breaks down to; get involved and make things better or step aside and don't complain.

[HowietheGreat]

"If you are suggesting that animals cannot love, which I take to mean that they cannot express desires (perhaps a leap, but if they are incapable of even such a small thing as preference of owners and only have 'cupboard love' like a behaviorist thinks) then that makes them robots programmed by their instincts and genes. In which case- why can't I have as many of them as pets in as horrible conditions as I want?"

-When I referred to Alusdra, I meant I was disturbed by her statement above and what she was stating.

[VoodooJoint]

I don't think I understand your point Howie.

I think it was stated that even if an animal cannot feel love (or feel it as we do) it can still feel pain, fear and neglect thus should not be kept in substandard conditions--as most reptiles are.

The disturbing part was that Alustra seemed to be saying that "lesser" animals can be kept in horrid conditions because they somehow cannot suffer. I'm certain she must have simply worded her statement wrong to cause a misunderstanding with what she actually meant though.

All of her previous statements lead me to believe that she takes excellent care of her animals.

[HowietheGreat]

I have no idea what she meant. It sounds as though she cares very much about her pets from her previous statments, but I could only take the above statement as it read-unless sarcasim was being implied.

[Alusdra]

I was trying to put forward an absurd in order to prove my point.

To clarify- I think that all animals have feelings, but that they are misunderstood due to anthropomorphizing and a cultural history of viewing animals as nature's automaton. I was irritated with this thread's trend to saying that reptile do not have the same scope of emotion/ intelligence as other animals (which may have been my misreading of other's posts) and thus was trying to say that if it is true (I disagree) that animals lack cognitive abilities such that they can understand and prefer a certain environment (eg- to not suffer, live in improper environments, captivity, whatever) then there is no reason not to keep them in poor conditions as they can't tell the difference. This would be an argument I hear a lot, though it generally is summed up as "but it's only a dog/cat/etc." which can be used in any situation from neglect to ignorance to deliberate cruelty.

I totally agree that people need to be educated about reptiles and most are not cared for properly. I even would agree that there needs to be licensing, especially for an animal that can kill a person (large cats, large constrictors, poisonous animals.) But I, personally, do not see that as a problem with keeping exotic pets, per se, but rather see it as an issue of education. I see it as a problem with petstores not with the exotics. Which, since that is the problem with guinea pigs (petstores give inaccurate and/or dangerous advice on petcare) I was annoyed that reptiles were just 'not suited to be pets' whereas guinea pigs are misunderstood/ have inaccurate care info. (Ignoring that some think that no animal should be a pet, which I think is probably a separate issue).

Then the whole "reptiles don't feel love" pushed a bunch of buttons and apparently I got incoherent... I hope I did actually clarify and not make things worse...

I'd like to think I take great care of my pets, especially now with realizing the wealth of information out on the net about new research in particular species' care. Like this site, for example. My cousin had a cavy in a rubber tub for years and I thought nothing of it. Now I'm ashamed and horrified and keep pressing for my aunt to get their cavies out of petstore cages. I did get the bunny separated from the cavies, thank goodness. They had heard that cavies can't be housed together and that bunnies are better cage mates, if you can imagine. They rescue all their animals, too. I was going to get a cavy before I read this site and saw the requirements- spoiling a parrot and 3 geckos is quite enough for me in a condo... yikes! (Plus I get to cuddle the roomies' kitties, so I'm not entirely fuzzy deprived).

[HowietheGreat]

Ahhhh.....yeah I was little baffled by what you said because you do seem to care very much for your pets and that threw me through a loop. I think reptiles can very intelligent and I would love to see everyone in rescue go to someone like you who cares as much as you do. My concern is the breeders as well as the removal of exotics from their natural enviroment. A friend of mine worked in a "storehouse" where they keep reptiles and small animals before being sent to pet stores. She said the conditions were terrible. She quit when they asked her to suffocate a sick baby rabbit in a plastic bag. I suppose not all breeders supply to pet stores, but I still question our ability to supply proper stimulus to these creatures. I grew up having anoles, tree frogs, fire belly newts, african water frogs.....all types of reptiles and amphibians. I have a soft spot for them and it is because of this that I really worry about their care and our ability to offer them the best quality of life. [SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT][/SIZE]