Please vote yes to animal ownership.

Selective banning and selective control, more than likely totally ineffective.

Here in SE La. we have the nutria rat, brought into the USA back in 1920s either as a novalty or a fur marketing deal, can't remember which. Several escaped, the state actually pays bounty on nuria tails. You would not believe how many of these things they are down here, and the damage caused to the marsh. You ever heard of coastal errosion? Nutria are a contributing factor.

Chinese tallow trees, ain't even an animal. You can't imagine how much damage this invasive species has done to the timber industry. The trees were originally brought into the USA to start a soap making industry back in the 1920s. They proved later to be worthless. Myself I have spent thousands on eradicating them on my property. And every year I get to do it all over again.

Just think a minute about ferral hogs. Hardly what I would call exotic however no hogs are native to the USA, but we sure as heck have a problem with'em.

I am all for personal freedom, do what you want on your property. But when your personal freedom starts impacting my pocket book, that's where you lose me. So because of the irresponsible exotic pet owners the responsible exotic pet owner loses his rights, society pays the price and the animal ulitimately loses. And unfortunately whether or not we are talking about hooved, fish, furred, fowl or reptile a certain segment will always be irresponsible.

Invasive cichlids, cane toads, snakeheads, tillapia, water hyacynths, what else you need to hear about?

As I stated earlier I am on the fence, caught between my beliefs on personal freedom, and what I know concerning damage done by invasive, exotic species. So I will not vote one way or the other.
 
Quote:
X2
thumbsup.gif
 
Hey 29, I respect your opinion completely about issues with invasiveness, but did want to point out that most of your examples are not actually related to the pet market. With the exception of the Burmese python, the examples you list are actually tied to things such as game hunting, agriculture (or any imported goods...locally, our aspens are being decimated by a beetle that probably just hitch-hiked over unseen on a shipment), accidental introduction (ie. zebra mussel), weed control and fur in the case of the nutria, pest control introductions gone wrong, and so forth. I just think it is important to keep that context in mind for a topic purely related to pet ownership.
smile.png
 
Quote:
Okay how about them iguana things running rampant in Florida and Nile monitors and Some kind of big rat down in the Keys.

Who can deny that they don't know the story about tigers running wild in Ohio ( I think it was Ohio) recently.

I would imagine if it could be compared -- For every responsible exotic pet owner out there they have an irresponsible exotic pet owner.

And you are right I got on my high horse not particularly about the exotic pet industry, put mainly about invasive species-- however exotic pets account for a good portion of the problem.

Even our beloved chickens can become an invasive species.

Obviously it is a problem.
 
Aye, there are certainly released pets and problems associated with them being potentially invasive species (not all non-indiginous animals are invasive, though most invasive animals are non-indiginous). That said, the largest percentage of animals being introduced *and becoming a pest species* in our nation seem to be unintentional introductions from the global scale trade we have these days. For instance, the most common method of introducing non-native marine species occurs accidentally on ship ballasts:
http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/ansc_02/ansc_02_00134.html

People have taken steps to help out drastically in the pet department (education, controversial groups that will take in *any* exotic unwanted pets, no questions asked, etc.), but I haven't seen major steps taken in tighter regulation for accidentally introduced species, and somewhat doubt I will due to the big money imports and exports bring. It seems that the media stories focus on things like ESCAPED LIZARDS IN FLORIDA, but yet, the truly damaging species local groups have been battling in the last few states I've lived in have all been battling things like invasive insects and plants that were both accidentally and purposefully (pest-control for the insects, weed control for the plants along with landscaping) introduced. They get very little media time despite being a huge threat, the biggest in my current state! Couple with that the largest issue with biodiversity loss is actually habitat destruction (read human population and effects), but our media and culture tends to celebrate that largely based on our views on economics:
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5855164/Pampers-R-Welcomes-300-Millionth.html
http://www.rachelbirnbaumweb.com/Rachel_Birnbaum_Website/Gerber.html (This ad refers toa 300 millionth American sweepstakes the company ran)

Domestic pets actually seem to cause complex problems, due to their ability to interbreed. In Tibet, true, wild yak have become scarce, and a native cow/yak hybrid is not helping by breeding into the remaining gene pool. Similarly, domestic cats have done quite a number, especially in island locations, to things such as bird populations.

Again, it's not that you don't bring up a valid point and problem (didn't read to me as you being on a high horse at all!), it just seems impotant to me to keep such issues in perspective.
smile.png
 
Last edited:
Good points punk-a-doodle . And as I stated any reptiles that are released into the wild either by accident or intentionally will die during our Ohio winters.

Who can deny that they don't know the story about tigers running wild in Ohio ( I think it was Ohio) recently

That whole thing was very fishy. Yes, it happened in our state. The animals didn't eascape. The cages were cut open on the lions and tigers. The owner was found in his driveway dead from a gunshot wound. Authorities say it was self inflicted. A lot of people aren't so sure about that.
In the first place the guy had the keys to his cages. Why would he go through all of the trouble to cut holes in the chain link fencing big enough for lions and tigers to walk through? That is a lot of work.
Secondly how was it that the majority of the "escaped" animals were shot and killed on the guys driveway? When an animal escapes from a zoo it sometimes takes days or weeks for the animal to be rounded up and caught. It seems to me that the pickups with the "good old boys" and their guns were conviently gathered up quick enough to kill all of those big cats.
The people that are fighting for the exotic animal ban took this story and kept it in the media as long as possible to tote their beliefs. Jack Hannah even got involved and he is also working for a ban. Jack seems to have forgotten that he owned his own exotic animals before he started working for zoos. He also borrowed animals from private people to take on the talk shows. He would put out a "casting call" for camels, bear and tiger cubs,,,ect. I know because I know one of the people that he borrowd animals from.
twentynine you have brought up good points as well. I look forward to keeping this discussion going. We can all learn something along the way.​
 
What comes to mind when I think about this, is the old saying.

You can't unring a bell.

Once a breeding population is established, in places like the SE La marsh or the Everglades how is it controlled? How is it eradicated?

Impossible is the word that comes to mind.

In my particular case, in my location, we are not protected by extreme winter weather. We have aquatic plants that have choked the life out of bayous and lakes, came right out of the aquarium trade.

Look it is beyond debate that in the first place no law however restrictive will actually be enforceable and effective. Some cities have ordances pertaining to pitbull ownership. I would be willing to wager their dog pound is full of pitbulls. Much the same as gun control laws are suppose to keep firearms out of criminal hands, what a joke.
Just like the gun control laws effect honest citizens more than the criminal. So would any law restricting exotic animal ownership. The animal lover will have to give up ownership, the irresponsible will still have the lions tigers and bears.

You guys ever watch that show on animal planet? I think it's called big cat rescue or something like that. The number of places those guys go and find tigers. Amazes me to no end.
 
I know in Ohio the snakes and reptiles released would not be a problem like it is here in Fl. It is a fine line between letting people who truly enjoy the animals they keep and take care of their welfare plus those that may be affected ......and those that just keep them and don't care. I wouldn't have a problem with stiffer laws for invasive species, it might be good to have a law where they have to be micrchipped and registered and if found in the wild with out notifiction of escape, get a stiff outragous fine and community service at a animal shelter etc... Smaller fine if notified etc.... Fine goes back to regestiered owner, so maybe people would make sure who ever bought it registered it or kept better records.
I serious considered pinioning all my peafowl chicks (pea chicks) to keep people from just turning them loose, or them just flying off , sure they still could and peafowl are good surviors but they would be a heck of a lot easier to catch. There are large wild populations further south...... I also pinion all my swans, guiena fowl etc.... To keep them closer to home.
I have known people to just turn loose rabbits in the woods, or pheasants etc... Just because they got tired of them. It's a shame.
I had someone call about white pigeons , they wanted to turn them loose in a wedding ceromony ..... They didnt know they wouldn't come back home........ Not all white pigeons are homing pigeons
 
Last edited:

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom