whats this???

[leonut]

that article is absolutetly laughable...whoever wrote it obviously hates reptiles...and is simply not very educated on the subject. sad really...

i agree.

 

[AntMan612]

Reptiles were done an injustice when the first science fiction films were made. Trick photography to make lizards look like giant killer monsters or reptilian-like aliens probably contributes to the stigma.

We have good reasons to fear crocodiles and poisonous snakes and they should remain in the wild. Exotic reptiles that thrive better in the wild than they could ever do in captivity should probably be left in their natural habitats IMHO. But the domesticated reptiles we can keep as pets should not be in the same category.

 

[fallen_angel]

well said Anthony, I totally agree :main_thumbsup:

 

[AntMan612]

After coining the term "domesticated reptiles" in my last post, I came across the following quote on the Humane Society web page:

"Domestication Takes Thousands of Years"

Wild animals are not domesticated simply by being captive born or hand-raised. It's a different story with dogs and cats, who have been domesticated by selective breeding for desired traits over thousands of years. These special animal companions depend on humans for food, shelter, veterinary care, and affection. Wild animals, by nature, are self-sufficient and fare best without our interference. The instinctive behavior of these animals makes them unsuitable as pets."

This is awful! I know the organization probably means well in terms of their overall mission to protect animals, but I'm starting to question their credibility/qualifications as scientists and/or educators. And what about exotic birds, are they also against parrots as pets?

 

[AntMan612]

After more research, the Humane Society accepts parakeets, but not parrots, as pets. However, captive breeding of parakeets started in the 1800's, not thousands of years ago. Oh, well...

http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/rabbit_horse_and_other_pet_care/Choosing-the-Right-Bird.html