Your view of the reptile hobby

[CosmicOwl]

The comparison to killer whales is really silly. They're extremely intelligent and they also have deep emotional bonds with their family members that are often violently shattered when these parks move whales around. They also naturally roam over thousands of square miles of ocean, and the tanks most parks keep them in are the equivalent of snake rack systems[in terms of size]. Often times the parks will store multiple unrelated whales in the same small holding tanks at night, which causes stress and fighting.

There are just no valid parallels between keeping killer whales and reptiles.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

The comparison to killer whales is really silly. They're extremely intelligent and they also have deep emotional bonds with their family members that are often violently shattered when these parks move whales around. They also naturally roam over thousands of square miles of ocean, and the tanks most parks keep them in are the equivalent of snake rack systems. Often times the parks will store multiple unrelated whales in the same small holding tanks at night, which causes stress and fighting.

There are just no valid parallels between keeping killer whales and reptiles.

Don't meant to degrade your post, but I would say snake racks are not even comparable to keeping killer whales in those parks. Keeping snakes in racks has no where near the negative impact on the animal as keeping killer whales in those parks. Just want to exaggerate that point.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Don't meant to degrade your post, but I would say snake racks are not even comparable to keeping killer whales in those parks. Keeping snakes in racks has no where near the negative impact on the animal as keeping killer whales in those parks. Just want to exaggerate that point.

I meant that they were similar in size. It's obviously much more traumatic for killer whales.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

I meant that they were similar in size. It's obviously much more traumatic for killer whales.

Yes I know what you meant, I just wanted to exaggerate the difference between the two.

[lady_bug87]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Weakness is also subjective. They may be weak to their native environment, but if they can live long in captivity(captivity being the new environment) then are they still weak? And if they are able to live long and healthy lives in captivity, is it still morally reprehensible and if so why?

How do you feel about humans nurturing the weak(handi-caps, disabled...etc)?

Genetic weakness is determined by physical attributes that affect the way they live and reproduce. Each generation that gets produced becomes weaker unless outcrossed properly. Clutch sizes drop, hatch rate suffers, birth defects increase etc. You may not see it in F2- F4 but it does happen, its a proven fact that once genetic variation decreases so does the genetic stability. In fact there are pieds that do not produce viable clutches since they have been so imbed. I would consider them genetically weak. No matter the environment.

I find the human question insulting.

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

By the way my question on humans was not part of the argument. I was just interested in her opinion on the separate subject of humans. I didn't mean to make it sound like I was using that question as a part of my argument.

I'm a caregiver to elderly grandparents and before my son came along I worked as a social worker in geriatrics and palliative care..

Apologize when ready.

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

The comparison to killer whales is really silly. They're extremely intelligent and they also have deep emotional bonds with their family members that are often violently shattered when these parks move whales around. They also naturally roam over thousands of square miles of ocean, and the tanks most parks keep them in are the equivalent of snake rack systems. Often times the parks will store multiple unrelated whales in the same small holding tanks at night, which causes stress and fighting.

There are just no valid parallels between keeping killer whales and reptiles.

The point was on exotics in general.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by lady_bug87

Genetic weakness is determined by physical attributes that affect the way they live and reproduce. Each generation that gets produced becomes weaker unless outcrossed properly. Clutch sizes drop, hatch rate suffers, birth defects increase etc. You may not see it in F2- F4 but it does happen, its a proven fact that once genetic variation decreases so does the genetic stability. In fact there are pieds that do not produce viable clutches since they have been so imbed. I would consider them genetically weak. No matter the environment.

I find the human question insulting.



I'm a caregiver to elderly grandparents and before my son came along I worked as a social worker in geriatrics and palliative care..

Apologize when ready.

I guess you're not getting my point. Why do you keep bringing inbreeding into this?

The only thing I am asking is why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles...just go over my last few posts. I clearly state I'm not talking about inbreeding, assist feeding...etc. I'm only talking about keeping reptiles and why it's wrong to do so.

And you miss my point again on the human part. It wasn't asked to be part of my argument. It was a side question to see where your head is at when using the same logic(nurturing the weak) with humans. It had no hidden agenda...something I also clarified.

Apologize when ready... =[

[StudentoReptile]

Okay, before we all get too huffy-puffy about this, let's recap a little bit....

1.) We can all generally agree to some extent, that keeping reptiles in captivity (especially in the private sector) is a selfish endeavor, whether it is for breeding, display or just for pets. Some of us come to terms with it, some of us are in denial, whatever. But with the rare exception of projects involving restoration of wild populations that may require captive breeding, anything typically involves us keeping the animals for our benefit, not theirs.

2.) Comparing different species is like comparing apples to oranges. Different species have different needs physiologically, mentally, and socially. This is old hat to many of us here, but it bears repeating. Comparing orcas to dogs to iguanas to snakes can be a murky discussion because the bottom line is THEY ARE NOT ALL THE SAME! Snakes prefer dark, warm, relatively confined quarters in solitude and generally thrive well in those conditions, where as dogs do not, so comparing basements full of snake racks to puppy mills does not fly. Period. The inhumane conditions of one species does not constitute inhumane conditions for another; ergo, the morality & ethics of keeping those different animals are not equal as well.

3.) The issue of longevity was brought up. I already noted my thoughts on that point, but to add to it, I'll merely say something that has been said many times before: merely surviving is not thriving.
------

This is and always be a very controversial topic. I keep reptiles just like everyone else. I can rationalize what I do just like everyone else, but at the end of the day, I keep reptiles in cages because I like to look at them and find them fascinating. Would my herps be better off in their native habitats instead of the confined quarters I keep them in? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps they would be less stressed to some degree, but I do know they are less exposed to disease and predators, and yes, they will likely live longer in my care. I also know my BP has been the first snake many people has ever held. my tortoises will bring joy and wonder to my children and (hopefully) grandchildren in decades to come. My water snake will help educate others about native species and proper snake identification. So besides my own selfish desires, I use my herps as tools or ambassadors to "give back" to my community and hopefully further the hobby in more ways than to just help people find better ways to keep snakes in plastic tubs.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

I guess you're not getting my point. Why do you keep bringing inbreeding into this?

The only thing I am asking is why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles...just go over my last few posts. I clearly state I'm not talking about inbreeding, assist feeding...etc. I'm only talking about keeping reptiles and why it's wrong to do so.

And you miss my point again on the human part. It wasn't asked to be part of my argument. It was a side question to see where your head is at when using the same logic(nurturing the weak) with humans. It had no hidden agenda...something I also clarified.

Apologize when ready... =[

Honestly you're beginning to change the argument to fit your needs. You place these parameters on what anyone can build their response on because it doesn't fit with the view you're trying to get.

You're essentially trying to railroad people into appeasing your view.

You started out with this whole general topic but you keep telling the respondants that they can't use certain arguments...assist feed, inbreeding and such...

As well you simply can't compares snakes and humans. Even with your above explanation you're bringing them into the argument to try and goad Lori into saying something that will prove her a hypocrit. Compare apples to apples.

Lastly, selfish is not a good trait to have so how can one be selfish but yet still doing good? You're grasping at straws because now we're onto the definition of the word "selfish" and what that means.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Honestly you're beginning to change the argument to fit your needs. You place these parameters on what anyone can build their response on because it doesn't fit with the view you're trying to get.

You're essentially trying to railroad people into appeasing your view.

You started out with this whole general topic but you keep telling the respondants that they can't use certain arguments...assist feed, inbreeding and such...

Not at all. My original question to Lori was " why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles". She is the one who brought up inbreeding, assist feeding, and weakening a populations genes. No railroading here.

Yes some things you just can't use in an argument because it has no bearing. The only thing I was interested in was why it's wrong to keep reptiles....she finally gave her answer.

As well you simply can't compares snakes and humans. Even with your above explanation you're bringing them into the argument to try and goad Lori into saying something that will prove her a hypocrit. Compare apples to apples.

You're free to think this, but it's only an assumption and accusation on your part. I clarified there were no hidden motives behind that question and I also gave my reasoning as to why I asked.

Lastly, selfish is not a good trait to have so how can one be selfish but yet still doing good? You're grasping at straws because now we're onto the definition of the word "selfish" and what that means.

Do good? I never said anything about doing good. No grasping at straws here, just asking why selfish automatically makes something morally reprehensible.

Putting words in my mouth and making accusations at the same time.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Not at all. My original question to Lori was " why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles". She is the one who brought inbreeding, assist feeding, and weakening a populations genes with these factors. No railroading here.

Yes some things you just can't use in an argument because it has no bearing. The only thing I was interested in was why it's wrong to keep reptiles....she finally gave her answer.



You're free to think this, but it's only an assumption and accusation on your part. I clarified there were no hidden motives behind that question and I also gave my reasoning as to why I asked.



Do good? I never said anything about doing good. No grasping at straws here, just asking why selfish automatically makes something morally reprehensible.

Putting words in my mouth and making accusations at the same time.

Yes. She brought aspects in because she felt they would help her argument. You then told her she can't use them to support her argument. So yes I am correct. Thank you.

Again it's no assumption. You're comparing apples to oranges. Compare apples to apples. Humans are not apples in this case.

You asked why being selfish is wrong. Quite simply it's because selfish is a trait that is widely accepted as a negative trait. Ergo it's wrong to be selfish.

Like I said you're now at the definition of selfish to prove a point. You've lost...

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Yes. She brought aspects in because she felt they would help her argument. You then told her she can't use them to support her argument. So yes I am correct. Thank you.

I never told her she couldn't use those factors, but I am saying it doesn't logically follow to use them.

What do those aspects have to do with just keeping reptiles? How does putting a cornsnake in a 4x2x2 cause inbreeding?

See my point?

Again it's no assumption. You're comparing apples to oranges. Compare apples to apples. Humans are not apples in this case.

It is in fact an assumption and an accusation(Accusing me for trying to be sneaky), there is no way getting around it. You could have saved me the trouble by going back to read my reasoning for asking the question. I said it was a side question not meant to be part of my argument, I just wanted to see how she applies that logic when it comes to humans.

You asked why being selfish is wrong. Quite simply it's because selfish is a trait that is widely accepted as a negative trait. Ergo it's wrong to be selfish.

Like I said you're now at the definition of selfish to prove a point. You've lost...

Well I guess I don't have much else to say then. To me wrong = bad... usually meaning someone/something suffers.

If I am being selfish and nothing suffers I don't see how it's wrong. So I will agree to disagree on why selfish automatically makes something wrong.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by lady_bug87

The point was on exotics in general.

That's the problem. Generalizing all exotics is absurd. There are some that do extremely poorly in captivity(like killer whales) and some that thrive(like corn snakes). The same rules do not apply to all exotics, they don't even apply to all reptiles.