Many people feel they have the right to keep any animal as long as they provide proper care for it. Critics say that exotic animals belong in their natural habitats and not in cages, where they can suffer from abuse, neglect, and boredom. Welfarists believe that even well-treated exotic pets should not be kept in captivity because it violates their wild nature. Law enforcement and animal control officers point out that exotic pets pose a health hazard to people because their temperaments can be unpredictable.
One of the most popular exotic pets in 2005 was the sugar glider. Sugar gliders are small members of the opossum family that live in the treetops in tropical regions of Australia and Tasmania. They have loose skin flaps between their wrists and ankles that allow them to leap and glide through the air for up to 300 feet. Sugar gliders are cute, furry little creatures that are heavily marketed in the United States as pocket pets. People purchase sugar gliders from pet stores and breeders and keep them in cages that are typically about three feet high and two to three feet wide and deep. Owners hang tiny baskets and perches from the tops of the cages so they can watch the animals jump between them. The vast majority of the animals are raised by breeders, not imported from the wild.
Some people think it is wrong to keep wild animals in captivity, even those born in captivity. Exotic breeders argue that an animal born and raised in a cage does not miss the wild because the animal has never experienced it. Critics do not agree with this argument. They believe that captive-born wild animals retain the natural urges and instincts of their species. Under this reasoning, a sugar glider that was born and raised in a cage would be frustrated because it would still have the urge to glide long distances above the treetops, even though it had never done so.
Exotic pets are offered for sale in pet stores, on the Internet, at auctions, and in trade publications, such as Animal Finder's Guide. The National Alternative Pet Association (NAPA) operates a Web site that in 2005 listed more than 250 breeders, dealers, and shops that specialize in exotic pets. The site also provides information and Internet links for a variety of clubs and organizations for exotic pet owners. NAPA complains that people with exotic pets suffer from discrimination and have difficulties finding food, supplies, veterinarians, shelters, and rescue groups for their animals. Zoos are often unwilling to provide needed information and will not take unwanted exotic pets.
Exotic pets are banned or regulated in many states. Figure 9.4 was compiled by the Animal Protection Institute in October 2004. At that time the organization said that thirteen states banned private ownership of big cats, wolves, bears, reptiles, and most primates. Another eight states had partial bans. Fourteen states required private owners to obtain a license or permit. The remaining fifteen had little to no oversight of private ownership of exotic pets.
On its Web site in 2005, NAPA complained that "even though many exotic pet species have been bred in captivity for a long time now, the laws still treat them like second class pets in some areas." The organization believes that a few bad incidents involving exotic pets have been blown out of proportion, and that exotic-pet owners are unfairly blamed for declining populations of endangered species. NAPA insists that captive breeding is the only chance for some species. NAPA claims that many public shelters and wildlife rescue groups give preference to zoos and will euthanize exotic animals instead of allowing private individuals to take them.
All major animal rights and welfare groups oppose the keeping of exotic pets, expressing concern about degradation of natural populations and the care that captive animals receive. Wildlife collectors are blamed for harming sensitive habitats and killing nontarget animals. Animal rights activists and welfarists tend to be opposed
FIGURE 9.4
State laws relating to private possession of exotic animals, 2004
For example, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) reports that trappers in Argentina cut down thousands of tropical trees to capture baby macaws for collectors. This has destroyed vital habitat for the remaining animals. Tropical fish in the Philippines are sometimes caught by spraying low doses of cyanide into the water. The chemical temporarily stuns the fish, but it is very poisonous to the fragile coral reefs in which they live. Baby orangutans are often caught by shooting their mothers because the babies cling to their dead mothers' bodies instead of running away. Animal groups publicize these concerns to note that exotic animals are not only an animal welfare issue but also an environmental and conservation issue.
The exotic pet trade is a multibillion-dollar industry with both legal and illegal elements. According to PETA's Web site in 2005, birds are smuggled into the United States more than any other exotic animals. The birds are force-fed before the trip and have their beaks taped shut. Their wings are also clipped. PETA says that up to 80% of tropical birds in each shipment die during transit. Welfare groups claim that on average more than half of all wild animals captured for the pet trade die before they reach their final destination.
Exotic animals that do survive long enough to be kept as pets can suffer from poor nutrition and care at the hands of inexperienced and uninformed owners. The animals may be subjected to painful procedures like wing clipping, defanging, and declawing. Welfarists believe that only accredited zoos and sanctuaries should care for wild animals kept in captivity. This ensures the proper care for the animals and protects the public safety.
Pat Hocter is the publisher of the Animal Finder's Guide. He says he has raised hundreds of exotic cats (lions, tigers, ligers, cougars, leopards, jaguars, bobcats, and servals) as well as many breeds of monkeys and baboons, fancy livestock, wolves, coyotes, reptiles, and fish. In a quote on his Web site in 2005, he noted that "the last hope before extinction for many animal species is captive breeding."
In 2002 the Captive Wild Animal Protection Coalition (CWAPC) was formed in California. It describes itself as a "consortium of zoo professionals, sanctuary operators, and animal protection groups." The CWAPC compiles data on wild animals kept in captivity around the world. Every month it releases a report listing human fatalities and injuries, animal fatalities, and other incidents involving captive wild animals. The CWAPC estimates that in 2004 there were four human fatalities, fifty human injuries, eighty-one animal escapes, and 307 animal fatalities associated with captive wild animals in the United States. The CWAPC is opposed to the keeping of wild animals as pets in the United States and is working to outlaw the practice. An undated fact sheet available on the CWAPC Web site in 2005 suggests that there are approximately 173 million tropical birds, 8.8 million reptiles, 10,000–20,000 big cats, 5,000–7,000 tigers, and 3,000 primates being kept as pets in the United States. The CWAPC also estimates that 90% of all exotic pets die within the first two years of captivity, and considers exotic pet ownership to be both inhumane to the animals and dangerous to people.
Reptiles and Amphibians, or Herps
The branch of zoology that deals with reptiles and amphibians is called herpetology; therefore, many people refer to these animals as "herps." Popular herp pets include snakes, turtles, frogs, and lizards. Demand for herps increased greatly in the United States during the 1990s due in part to the popularity of the Jurassic Park movies and the Crocodile Hunter television show. According to the APPMA, the number of herp pets increased from two million in 1991 to nine million in 2003.
Pet stores and breeders market herps to the public as pets that need much less care, space, and attention than traditional pets such as dogs and cats. Also, herps are considered good for people with allergies because they have no fur. Finally, herp enthusiasts praise ownership as a conservation measure because it helps to preserve species that may be endangered in their natural environment. They argue that familiarizing the public with traditionally feared or disliked species, such as snakes, helps engender more public respect for such animals and encourages more people to conserve wild populations.
Herpetologists at the Smithsonian Institution (SI) in Washington, D.C., have a different view. The SI staff of the National Museum of Natural History's (NMNH) Division of Amphibians and Reptiles noted on the NMNH Web site in 2005 that they "discourage anyone from keeping an amphibian or a reptile as a pet." The primary reason is lack of proper care. The SI staff note that herps are often transported and kept in unhealthy and overcrowded conditions. SI is particularly critical of pet stores, saying that it is not uncommon to see malnourished, sick, and even dead herps in the cages. The Web site also points out that herps are not low-maintenance pets, as claimed by pet stores and breeders. Although herps do require less attention than pet dogs and cats, they still have very particular diet, space, social, and even heating needs that must be met to keep them healthy. Many owners are not aware of these needs or are unable or unwilling to meet them.
Zoos have their own complaints about herp pets. Zookeepers say that they receive numerous phone calls from owners who need advice on how to care for a herp or want to donate it a zoo. There is a common misconception among people who buy baby herps (particularly alligators and pythons) that they can always give them to zoos if the animals get too big to handle. Accredited zoos concentrate on endangered species with known genetic histories. They will not accept pet herps for this reason. Many herp owners release their pets into the wild when the animals get too big or become too much trouble. These animals face many dangers in an unknown environment. They compete with native herps for food and resources and can spread diseases among them.
Tigers
In June 2003 Dr. Eric Miller, director of the St. Louis Zoological Park, testified before a U.S. House of Representatives committee that there were between 5,000 and 10,000 pet tigers in the United States and that this number exceeded the number of wild tigers living throughout Asia. Wild tigers are an endangered species, and private ownership of them is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act. However, ownership of a captive-born endangered animal is legal in many states.
Accredited zoos have been collecting wild tigers for decades. Many of these tigers were bred in captivity to produce very popular zoo babies to bring in crowds. This resulted in an oversupply of adult tigers, many of which wound up in private hands. Pet owners, breeders, circuses, and roadside zoos have interbred different varieties of these animals, resulting in a large population of generic (not purebred) tigers.
Accredited zoos work to preserve endangered tiger species through selective breeding programs. Only pure-bred tigers with traceable ancestries are used. Generic tigers, or mutts, as they are called, have no value to these programs. According to the environmental journal The Ecologist, biologists do not believe that mutt tigers could even survive in the wild. Sloppy breeding to produce popular pet characteristics has diluted traits that subspecies would need to survive in particular environments. For example, jungle tigers have been interbred with Siberian tigers. The resulting offspring are not equipped to live in either the extreme heat of the tropical jungle or in the frigid cold of Siberia. Also, tiger cubs born in captivity are often separated from their mothers after only a few days or weeks. In the wild, cubs would stay with the mother for up to two years and learn necessary survival skills. Captive-born cubs are often declawed and defanged to make them easier to handle. Welfarists say that pet tigers are often kept chained or confined in small enclosures and may be beaten into submission.
Wolf Hybrids
Wolf hybrids are the result of cross-breeding wolves (Canis lupus) with domesticated dogs (Canis familiaris) to create a new type of animal possessing attributes of both. According to the International Wolf Center, located in Ely, Minnesota, it is possible for wolves to mate with domesticated dogs and produce offspring, but this rarely occurs in the wild because wolves are so territorial. Most wolf-dog hybrids, therefore, come from breeding in captivity for the pet trade. Owners of hybrids—or wolfdogs, as enthusiasts call them—insist they are wonderful, intelligent animals with much to offer people who are educated and prepared for the challenges hybrid ownership brings. However, these people frequently also distinguish between the terms "pet" and "companion," noting that the nature, temperament, and behavior of wolf-dog hybrids make them good candidates for companionship but not for pet-keeping (The Wolf Dunn, http://www.inetdesign.com/wolfdunn/wolfdogfaq/pets.html, accessed June 11, 2005). In other words, hybrids tend to be unsuitable for people in the market for cute, cuddly, obedient pets.
Advocates for wolfdogs are vocal in discouraging unprepared people from purchasing them. Hybrids cannot be walked on leashes like dogs, nor can they be kept chained or roped in a yard. They must be placed in secure pens because they tend to escape enclosures easily. They also can be extremely possessive of food and territory, and they play rough like wolves. Therefore they are not necessarily good choices for families with children or limited space. Animal control officers and law enforcement officials are not as generous in their attitudes toward hybrids, citing numerous cases of sudden, frequently fatal, attacks, usually on children.
Most animal rights and welfare groups, as well as organizations dedicated to researching and protecting wolves, are against hybridization of wolves and dogs. Wolf Haven International of Tenino, Washington, has a campaign called "Think Twice" aimed at educating the public about the downside of hybrid ownership. The organization, which runs a sanctuary for unwanted, abandoned, abused, and neglected wolves born in captivity, stated on its Web site in 2005: "Breeding wolves with dogs does not preserve wild wolf populations, and instead places them at risk by threatening genetic purity and negatively impacting public attitudes toward wolves. As for the wolf-dogs themselves, they are the victims of a highly lucrative pet trade that heavily relies upon a potential owner's ignorance or disregard of the truth about wolf-dog hybrids." The group also maintains that there "is no justification for the amount of neglect, abuse, confinement, abandonment and euthanization inflicted upon these animals" (http://www.wolfhaven.org/Think_Again_why.htm, accessed June 11, 2005). Because they are neither wolves nor dogs, unwanted hybrids cannot be placed at shelters for dogs or at sanctuaries for wolves, nor can they be accepted by zoos. Typically they are euthanized.
As of 2004, thirteen states had banned breeding, possession, and importing/exporting wolf hybrids. Thirteen more had strict regulations on the private possession of these animals. In states without legislation regarding hybrids, local governments sometimes have ordinances restricting their purchase, sale, and ownership. Specific groups that oppose hybridization include the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), the American Veterinary Medical Association, and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). In 1998 the United Kennel Club (UKC) published its position paper on wolf-dog hybrids (http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/ukcpos.htm). Citing research that found no genetic difference between wolves and dogs, the UKC called regulations unenforceable because there could be no way of distinguishing between wolves, dogs, and hybrids.
User Comments Add a comment…