animals that shouldnt be kept as pets

torie

torie

Well-Known Member
hey all,
i know this forum is about zoos but i just wanted to ask what peoples opinions are about the sorts of animals that should be kept as pets.

this query was sparked after i did a google search for baby cotton top Tamarins and found a website of a lady who i am assuming is in the us who sold clothes for monkeys and even monkeys themselves. the site had pictures of baby monkies and even a gibbon wearing nappies and shirts! i dont know what species they were but that doesnt even matter. with all the red tape and regulations that zoos have to follow to care for these and other species i just dont think its right that some untrained member of the public should be allowed to keep such exotic animals as cotton top tamarins especially in nappies!!!

sorry for ranting but i just dont think its right.

from Torie

P.S im not against pets in general i just think that some species arnt made to live in houses.
 
I think that most animals can be kept, but I wouldnt call any primate a pet, with the correct set up and research then I see no problem, its people like this lady that give it a bad name.

Keeping a monkey in a house and dressing it up isnt right and should not be done, but keeping a monkey in a properly designed enclosure outside where it has the room it needs and can socialise with its own type is ok, this is just my opinion and I know there are those that would disagree, primates have a delicate mental state so your husbandry needs to be spot on.
 
i see where you coming from and i agree under the right circumstances and given the best care maybe monkys as "pets" is acceptable. in the case of the women sellung clothed monkies the pictures on her site show them living in bird cages and a majority if the time on their own.

but lets look the broder picture, exotic pets isnt limited to monkys what about the hundreds of people who keep lions and tigers in their backyards. surley that is not ok under any circumstance.

and i hope i havnt offended anyone who keeps exotic pets as i said there are times and if the care is of the best standard that its ok
 
I do see what you mean but again if a zoo can do it then why shouldnt a private keeper be able to? with an animal like that its very specialist and I agree that not just anyone should have the right to keep a lion or tiger, in the wrong hands it could be very dangerous, but if someone has the money space knowledge and expertise then I dont see why not.

It needs to be strictly goverend though, here in the UK getting an animal like that and the correct liscenses is not an easy task, but in the US the laws in some states seem a lot more slack than they are here, so in theory anyone could get one with no knowledge or even equipment.

And about monkeys in bird cages thats the kind of image that primate keepers are trying to get away from it used to be done in the past alot because people just didnt know any better. Whats her site? just out of interest.
 
Exotics as pets

Perhaps it might be easier to define what "exotics" are easier to be kept as pets by the average person .....
If one has the time , space , money , knowledge to do so , my guess is that they will be breeders . The average person on the street will not have all of those qualifications .
I am thinking of herpes in particular ......

And then there are certain species , which might appear to make reasonable pets , but are considered a noxious pest , or a native species , and one will need a special permit in order to keep them . The permits are NOT given out freely to any Tom Dick or Harry . Even zoos in NZ need to apply for permission to keep some native species !

I am sure that most of you still remember the enquiry we had a couple of months ago on this forum about the feasibility of keeping a macaw as a pet inside ones bedroom ......
 
As a zoo professional in the US, I'd like to add my humble opinion. I'm squarely agains anyone keeping primates of any size and large carnivores as "pets". No matter the professed dedication to these animals, it's too easy to become bored with the animal or have a reversal of fortunes leaving one financially unable to care for the animal. In reputable zoo settings there is a deeper field of keepers able to care for these animals. If Keeper A gets hit by a truck, Keeper B is still around to care for the animal. In the private sector, if Owner A gets hit by the same truck, perhaps the only person left to care for the animal is a grieving spouse, or a grumpy neighbor kid. I realize this is an extreme circumstance, but not out of the realm of possibility. I had to listen to the fellow who was "fixing" my computer ramble on about wrestling with his friend's pet lion. He was disappointed that the friend had said that no one but the owner would go in with the lion now because the animal was older and injury could occur--the lion is 13 years old. At least in this instance the cretin who owns him will be the one eaten, not the computer nerd who thinks playing with a lion is fun. Sorry to ramble but this is one of my pet peeves. I'm not even sure that folks should own any exotic animals.

Elaine
 
its a big problem, particuarly in the states but no doubt europe also.

fortunately in australia, there is virtually NO exotics that can legally be kept as pets.the list is more or less restricted to domestic animals and ornamental fish and birds. the reptile industry is becoming quite big here, but with the exception of the axolotl, all other herps are native (and fortunately we have a lot of native frogs, turtles, lizards and snakes).

we don't even have girbils or hamsters.

strangely however, we can keep ferrets. and if you really want to its relatively easy to aquire a native animal such as a wallaby or suger glider as a pet.

the big upside to this is we have very little zoo thefts. occasionally people steal a monkey but they are generally tarcked down or returned (often all the worse off for the experience). this is simply becuse a) there is no black market for exotic mammals here and b) a pet monkey is relatively conspicuous. most people know you can't just buy a pet monkey, so you've got a high chance of being turned in, especially since most ****** who steal a monkey because they like the notion of walking down the street with one perched on their shoulder.

the fact that you can keep dangerous animals particuarly endangered ones
at that in the US and some european countries as pets makes a bit of joke of CITES. the problem wont go away until there are federal laws in place prohibiting such idiots from getting their hands on these animals. in the meantime, the US continues to become overun with introduced species, exotic animals continue to be neglected, and rednecks get mauled and killed...
 
It's also created two separate "classes" of exotic animals in the States, so that you have, for example, zoo bred tigers of known ancestry and race, and also an under class of tigers of unknown ancestry and probably in many cases severely inbred and often exhibiting problems such as sway-backs, neck problems and in extreme cases, "pushed in" or shortened faces.These poor brutes are no use to anybody, certainly not the world gene pool, often spending their lives in a crappy cage in a back yard or basement.

The same applies to lions and to a lesser extent smaller cats such as cougars.

I also feel that it should be illegal to declaw or remove the fangs of such "pets". ( If they can do their owners some harm, good on 'em!)
 
I agree, this second class of exotic animals also creates problems when the current owners of these pets decide that they dont want them anymore. there is no where for these unwanted exotics to go, zoos dont want them becuase they cant use them for breeding and need to use the limited space that they have for genetically viable animals. The unwanted exotics are hard to sell off once their fully grown because people who want exotics such as big cats generally go for 'cute and cuddly' baby animals. This leave owners with one of two options, to donate their animals to ex-pet sancturaries which are often full or to kill the animals.:(

so isnt it better to just stop people from accessing these pets in the first place?
 
In the states just about anything can be kept as a "pet" I receive regular emails offering me baby kinkajou, capybara, etc. Today I got one from a person trying to sell a black leopard cub or swap for a cheetah. It is crazy how easy it is. Each state has it's own laws but these are barely enough. one website quotes the minimum size for a private tiger cage as twleve feet by six feet. barely enough room for the cat to turn around. It is good to know that in Aus. well NSW that the only people who can keep these anmals as pets are those who owned the animals they currently have before the ban was imposed in 1998. If you want a licence to keep an exotic animal then you either have to be licenced as a zoo or go through a hell of a lot of paperwork and even then, meet the standards of zoos.
 
Just being filthy rich won't get you permission, either.

Apparently the late Kerry Packer wanted to keep a couple of tigers privately at one of his properties in the Hunter valley some years back. (Source of the cats: his mate John Aspinall in Britain.)

Because they weren't going to be on public display, and weren't for scientific purposes, his application was refused.
 
yeah. you have to prove that you can care for them, that they should be there rather than somwwhere else among other things. They are considered pests and a pest licence is required from dpi to get them. but this is almost impossible unless you had the animals before bans were enforced
 
I think its a shame that private keepers cannot keep what they want in your countries, our system here in the UK works well with a few glitches, but all animals on the Dangerous wild animal license, need a vet to inspect the set ups once a year, protocals of what would be done in case of an emergency and a yearly fee as well as public liability insurance.

Our safety record is excellent there are very very few accidents in private DWA collections, and the licensing makes it so not anyone can go out and get what they want on a whim.

I feel strongly about this subject being a private animal keeper.
 
suik,

i very strongly oppose. you may think the personal benifits outweigh the risks in your country but the same set of weights doesn't necessarily apply in ours.

an escaped or purposefully released iguana or meerkat might have virtually nil chance of surviving in the british countryside, however the australian continent has virtually a representation of most world habitat types.

iguanas could very easily establish themselves in the wet-tropics of queensland, as could meerkats likely find a suitable habitat type in the arid regions of southern australia.

one only needs to see what devistation a certain brazilian toad has made to illustrate how even the smallest and seemingly benign of animals can cause absolute havoc in a different ecosystem.

it would be a different story if i wasn't aware that the world is full of irresponsible people. unfortunately i am aware of that.
 
Some fishes are unsuitable too

I am concerned about some of the fishes that are imported into the UK, which I consider are highly unsuitable for even the largest domestic aquarium. I think there is quite a few such species which are imported frequently, for example South American arowana and pacu, African tiger fishes (even the largest species), Florida gars etc. I have no problem with them in a public aquarium, but there is no way that adult specimens can live in the home.
I have also noted some very venomous fishes on sale, usually without any warning. Many years ago, my local store even had a blue-ringed octopus!

Alan
 
arowana only grow to about a metre, they can be easily kept by many fish-keepers. I had one myself for many years. Arapaima on the other hand, which I understand are occasionally available in pet shops in UK, Europe, USA etc, are another story entirely. I believe many shops over there now refuse to stock the tankbusters because they are aware of the problem, but equally there are still many that continue to sell them. I have also read that the public aquariums over there are constantly being offered huge fish, usually the most popular ones like red-tailed cats and pacu, and they can't take them because of the numbers around. Its the usual story of people buying things without thinking of the future, or thinking they can easily offload it once they outgrow the tank.
 
Chlidonias said:
arowana only grow to about a metre, they can be easily kept by many fish-keepers. I had one myself for many years.
Click to expand...

Can we agree to differ here? I don't concede my point about arowanas because they are very active fish for their size, and very susceptible to a disfiguring eye condition in captivity - although I accept that they are not as large as some of the other species mentioned such as pacu or red-tailed cats.
There seems to be a myth spreading through the UK that a fish will only grow big enough to 'fit its tank' (whatever that may mean). As I teach aquatics on an animal care course, I am told this more often each year, usually by new students who are happy to admit that they know nothing about fishes, apart from this important 'fact'.

Alan
 
gentle lemur said:
There seems to be a myth spreading through the UK that a fish will only grow big enough to 'fit its tank' (whatever that may mean).n
Click to expand...

its a global myth, but i agree largely a myth nonethless. the amount of times i've had to upsize tanks thanks to growing fish!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top