Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 701

0 members and 701 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,905
Threads: 249,104
Posts: 2,572,101
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, Pattyhud
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Threaded View

  1. #8
    BPnet Senior Member Bluebonnet Herp's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-28-2012
    Location
    Helotes, TX
    Posts
    1,161
    Thanks
    1,405
    Thanked 475 Times in 315 Posts

    Re: New "Dr K Exotic Vet" show

    Quote Originally Posted by Spoons View Post
    I'd guess because dogs, cats, horses, etc are domesticated, where most large birds are not and are either wild caught or have wild caught in their immediate history and thus are not at all adapted or suited for home living the way most people provide it. (I suppose the 'non domesticated' part is the same for reptiles, but the needs of birds and reptiles differ SO much it's like two ends of a scale!) I am not saying I agree or disagree with the mindset, just offering a possible explanation for it and giving an example from my personal knowledge.
    I know there's reptile rescuers who end up saying the same thing. There's just so many animals in bad shape out there, and they constantly have to deal with that - albeit many of the rescuers signed up for it - but because of the fact they just see so much of the neglected animals and hardly ever any of the responsibly kept animals, that it's all they ever think about and they come to the conclusion that hardly any animals ever receive proper care, which isn't entirely true. I hear some people just call it "Rescuer Syndrome."
    Domestication isn't entirely meaningful to the whole equation, and many birds in addition to some reptiles are often captive bred these days. Domestication doesn't have anything to do with how well they do in a home environment or not either. That varies from species to species - regardless of social status - and varies from individual to individual, in addition to who's keeping it, and what environment they provide it with. I would go so far as to say the term 'domestication' is scientifically meaningless when it comes to providing insight and understanding an animal. (A 'domestic' dog has more in common with an undomesticated wolf than it does with a 'domestic' cat. You also wouldn't keep a 'domestic' cat like you would a 'domestic' dog. A captive bred, "puppy-dog" tame pet Boa constrictor will most likely be a better pet than wild-born, aggressive feral "domestic" cat as well. People have also been keeping and breeding many 'undomesticated' animals longer than you'd think too. The list goes on...) I'd say that if an individual wanted to keep an animal, they should learn about the specific species (and possibly subspecies) and it's requirements before considering keeping them, all while ignoring the social status (but not laws!) associated with them.
    Last edited by Bluebonnet Herp; 11-11-2014 at 03:05 AM.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Bluebonnet Herp For This Useful Post:

    sorraia (11-20-2014)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1