Reptile keeping and wildlife conservation: Possible to co-exist?

[retic720]

I own 3 retics (2 of whom are rescues), a ball python and a leo and I'm proud of it. I also frown on wanton poaching/exploitation of animals in the wild.

Had one of those friendly discussions with my sister and she commented (she's not a big fan of my pets btw...) that if I really love my pets, I should set them free in the wild or give them up.

I of course explained to her that keeping a pet snake/gecko is (almost) no different from keeping a pet dog/cat...the only difference would be the husbandry techniques. It just so happens, reptile/exotic pet keeping is still relatively young, compared to keeping dogs (which I believe go way back, back in the days when man discovered fire) and cats (cat worship in ancient times anyone?)

Just need your two cents on something. If I am a reptile/exotic pet keeper and I also say that I do not condone wanton poaching/exploitation of animals in the wild, does this make me a hypocrite?

Thanks in advanced

[Dragoon]

well you can always keep albino or bright colored animals that cannot survive in the wild and claim it as you are saving them due to low survival rates of those in the wild. She may unintentionally have made a point due to the fact that most dogs cannot survive on their own and are dependant on people, even strays eat what we through away. Snakes can survive on their own for the most part. But to answer your question, i buy captive bred animals so I know the wild wasn't directly exploited by my actions.

[daniel1983]

Once an animal is established in captivity, it can be very harmful to native populations to release captive animals back into the wild.

You would have to know the exact origins of the animal to not cross wild genepools and introduce new genetics to an area.

Captive animals do get 'trained' in a sort of way. They are not 100% 'wild' once we start providing their food and water. My snakes expect food on a certain day of the week....they are conditioned to do so. What would happen if they were released in the wild?

It is difficult for a captive animal to establish itself in the wild. A captive release has to compete with established wild animals for resources. This is not as easy as some would believe. If they do establish themselves, they take resources away from originally wild populations.

Not to metion the possibility of introducing parasites and diseases into the wild population.....that could be nasty.

[retic720]

thanks for the feedback guys. At least I can be more comfy about my hobby without being a hypocrite

[JLC]

You can also ask your sister if she'd be willing to foot the bill to fly you and your animals to Indonesia, Africa, and Afghanistan to release them into the wild.

[wolfy-hound]

Just ask your sister is she supports people dumping unwanted cats and dogs into the wild. Cats and dogs do survive as "wild" populations, albeit in the domestic form of the species, in certain areas. Pariah dogs come to mind...

Tell her that just because she cannot love ALL animals equally, is no reason to not take proper care of pets. She's the hypocrite, because if she loved the pets, she would advocate taking proper care of them, not dumping to die a slow death.

[lillyorchid]

lol Judy you crack me up.

I agree with Theresa!

[tbowman]

You can also ask your sister if she'd be willing to foot the bill to fly you and your animals to Indonesia, Africa, and Afghanistan to release them into the wild.

The OP is in the Philippines. Retics are native there.

[JLC]

The OP is in the Philippines. Retics are native there.

Ah well...missed that little detail. But still...the ball and leo aren't. And maybe his retics are still from Indonesia.

[retic720]

@JLC:

While it's true that all of my retics are native to the Philippines, we have 7,100+ (my geography is hazey...) islands....good luck tracking which island my 3 retics originated from (and as for my fave retic shown in my avatar, good luck trying to pry her from my cold dead fingers)

@wolfy-hound:

Hmm...I like that "argument"