Should People Be Allowed to Keep Exotic Animals

voted yes





spooky

I think people should be allowed to keep exotics, now if we are talking about hots thats a little different. I think people should still be allowed to keep hots WITH the proper documentation and liscense. I plan on keeping a hot snake or two someday.

Voted yes..

Exotics animals make some of the greatest pets.. why we shouldn't be allowed to have them I've never understood, yes lions and tigers are different then burms rattlesnakes and even BP's. But in the end ANY animals has some amount of danger in owning. If they're going to ban exotics then why not ban cats and dogs? Or just take all of our rights all together And let us own nothing. Our pets an our community suffer blows constantly not just from people who have no idea what they're doing and juwt want to be noticed, but from.politicians who only seek re-election and have nothing else they can attack.... only as a community can we keep what rights we have left!

It's Fox, did you really expect anything like a fair assessment?

yes... and no, people who want to jump on the bandwagon and try to be cool or something and end up releasing them into the wild, or some retard who thinks it cute to take pictures of an infant and a 13 foot snake... no. People like me and I'm sure you who have a love for these animals and cater to their every need and are responsable with their animals... yes. In my 34 some years of loving these animals I have never been irresponsable with my animals.

I didn't take time to read all the way through the posts, so I hope this isn't a repeat. I think the problem is that there can be 50 years of peace, where no one gets hurt by any exotic animal, and one bad incident can cause such an uproar that causes everyone to over-react and say that they are all dangerous. Look at statistical facts, what do you think causes more injuries in a year, dogs or snakes? Yet dogs arent getting banned "except pit bulls which is a whole other rant I wont start, even though its moreso the owners fault" I think the problem is that too many irresponsible people get these pets and have no way of properly taking care of them. I may be dumb, but I think its a good idea to own a license to own giant snakes. Make people go through a class taught by a qualified, experienced person so they can become EDUCATED about certain animals to make a much more informed decision about getting one. Once they go through the class, then they get a license to legally own one. Thank God we have to go through hunters safety courses to get a hunters license, otherwise there would be a lot of uneducated people out there being stupid. People who say "all exotics are dangerous" obviously need to be educated about the facts...its just ignorance because they dont understand or know all the animals.....hope this makes sense because I had SO many ideas popping through my head.

Keep voting :). We can turn it around!

I voted yes. I agree with the people above that said that a person should be able to own any animal as long as they can emotionaly, physically, and financially provide for it. I also agree that for the potentially dangerous species( big cats, bears, retics, ect.) people should have to get permits.
What would one consider dangerous? Because dangerous could be considered simple biting or scratching. I've been bitten or scrached many more times by my kittens/cats, dogs and mice than by Lily(bp) , and the mouse only bit me once.

Honestly, I do think people should have to take a test or something. Not that, THAT matters much...look at all the horrible drivers. Of course, i also think people should take a test or get a license to have kids. That would probably cut down on a few things :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsmorphs2

Keep voting :). We can turn it around!

---

oh we will whether they like it or not :) just wondering how much it matters on a poll put up in October, but I think at the rate we're going we will pass the no's up by tomorrow.

We're winning. :)

The poll doesn't specify what kind of exotic animal. They say "exotic" in a general sense. They give several choices to No, but only one Yes. I find it to be an unfair poll as some exotics are not dangerous.(FOX...go figure) Exotic animal is classified as anything other than companion animal (dogs/cats). So rats, ferrets, rabbits, hamsters, birds, reptiles, amphibians, etc etc are scientifically considered exotic. Any animal from Petco/petsmart are exotic. I don't think people realize that. Everyone who answered 'No' are assuming cougar in the closet and alligator in the bathtub scenario. I've experienced more dangerous dogs and cats than any exotic animal I've come across.

But I do agree with everyone who mentioned how people shouldn't own a lot of the more unrealistic pet choices....(big cats/apes/bears/etc etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raptor

The issue is, "exotic" is a catch all term for anything that isn't a dog, cat, mouse, gerbil, guinea pig, hamster, or rat. Birds, reptiles, amphibians, and most fish species all all considered exotic, yet are easily bought at pet stores. Hell, even rare breeds of cattle/sheep/goats are considered exotic.

---

From a veterinary stand point, mice, gerbils, guinea pigs, hamsters and rats are classified as exotic animals. :P

I feel if you can meet the nutritional, environmental, and psychological needs of an animal and you have the proper training to be able to care for such an animal, then I say there shouldn't be a problem with you owning one.

The key word in the above paragraph is IF. Take a big cat for example. These animals are extremely dangerous and have very specific requirements. First of all, you must have a thorough knowledge of its nutrient requirements and be able to provide that. Environment is also another biggie with these cats. And that doesn't just mean giving it enough space to run. You must be able to provide it with a stimulating environment and above all, an environment that does not include human interaction. People think big cats are just that, big house cats and that is far from the truth. If you want to keep a big cat, you must distance yourself from it and limit human - cat interaction to a bare minimum, only to move the cat for habitat maintenence, vet visits, and viewings from a distance. People think they can go into these cages and play with their "pet" tiger. It just isn't like that and you will get yourself killed treating a tiger like a pet.

Now, does this mean no one should be allowed to have them, no. But the person that does keep a big cat needs to keep in mind, its not a pet, its a specimen, an animal you choose to keep to observe and care for, not interact with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay_Bunny

I feel if you can meet the nutritional, environmental, and psychological needs of an animal and you have the proper training to be able to care for such an animal, then I say there shouldn't be a problem with you owning one.

The key word in the above paragraph is IF. Take a big cat for example. These animals are extremely dangerous and have very specific requirements. First of all, you must have a thorough knowledge of its nutrient requirements and be able to provide that. Environment is also another biggie with these cats. And that doesn't just mean giving it enough space to run. You must be able to provide it with a stimulating environment and above all, an environment that does not include human interaction. People think big cats are just that, big house cats and that is far from the truth. If you want to keep a big cat, you must distance yourself from it and limit human - cat interaction to a bare minimum, only to move the cat for habitat maintenence, vet visits, and viewings from a distance. People think they can go into these cages and play with their "pet" tiger. It just isn't like that and you will get yourself killed treating a tiger like a pet.

Now, does this mean no one should be allowed to have them, no. But the person that does keep a big cat needs to keep in mind, its not a pet, its a specimen, an animal you choose to keep to observe and care for, not interact with.

---

That is IMO the best responses to a big cat I've read. As I state in my thread about Animal Planet, I don't personally think people should own those kinds of animals. BUT... I could never tell someone to get rid of there "pet" as long as they give it good requirements. That's like going up to someone who own a RTB an saying "you're snakes to big Tim to get rid of it"

It's not right... but that's life. And we have to stand together And fight for our rights. Whether it be by supporting the USARK or even just teaching a few kids about little BP's without each of us doing our best, we can kiss our rights good bye.
Doesn't mean we still won't hide hen in the basement though. ;)

I would add, however, that training big cats using a treat reward system, while the human is safely on the other side of a fence, is extremely beneficial. The more human-acclimated the animal is, the happier it will be in captivity (ie, less stressed, and much easier to manage).
No hands-on interaction isn't the same as no interaction. Interaction with good barriers is good.

This is true for any large an potentially dangerous animal. If someone owns a reticulated python, they know that they need to have another person present when the cage is open, period--and should always have backup when handling it. But they do need to handle it, because an untamed retic is even more dangerous. Alligators--same deal. Don't put yourself in a position to be mauled and drowned, but if you ever want to move the animal, it's much nicer to be able to have it follow you than to wrestle it to the ground and tape its mouth shut.
It's not a pet, and you shouldn't pet it, but it should see humans as a positive thing--that makes its life far better than it would otherwise be.

I'm coming in at the eleventh hour but I did vote about two weeks ago. I think Ohio and the HSUS is thinking too black and white. Take dogs for example, my sister in law found a wolf pup and was required by the state to have it registered, permitted, and she had to meet certain safety requirements in order to keep it. That was fifteen years ago and the dog is no longer alive but each year she had to meet state regulations and complied. Her wolf never bit anyone but my Chihuahua bit everything and everybody who came near.

My point is judging an animal by it's proximity to the wild is as bad as judging us for race or religion. An animal is only a threat when people try to make it human. Ohio could solve this problem by simply setting up guide lines for dangerous exotics and enforcing them. Banning every exotic is only going to damage the economy even more then it is now.