# Tiger cubs for sale



## *burnleygirl*

I have just been researching something on tigers and came across this...

Home raised Tiger Cubs for sale

:gasp::gasp::gasp::gasp:


----------



## daikenkai

Scam anyone? :lol2:


----------



## rum&coke

Awww I want one :flrt:


----------



## Dizz

Odd also found here:

TIGER CUBS READY

Considering AKC is American Kennel Club as far as I am aware, and you can't just own a tiger, yeah I imagine it's a scam!!!!

I wonder if anyone falls for it.

Someone should call


----------



## Marine

:lolsign: AKC registered cats in Lewisham

doh! :roll:


----------



## angela__k__84

Well, you can own a tiger and they do go up for sale - and you can get them cheaper than that.
However - they are very rarely registered with the AKC! :lol2:
Also, on the second one that is three different tigers and the woman in the last picture is wearing a t-shirt with the name of a reserve/zoo in NY!
Also - what this means I do NOT know!
"Dolly will be very big, her sire being our little 6 lb Black Jack."
A 6lb tiger?!


----------



## SiUK

apparently there are more tigers kept as pets by private keepers in the United States, than there is left in the wild


----------



## angela__k__84

No doubt. Places like Texas you don't even need a license!


----------



## stacy

SiUK said:


> apparently there are more tigers kept as pets by private keepers in the United States, than there is left in the wild


 yeah iv heard that, a friend of mine in codnor had 2 bengal tigers he was in news all time over them


----------



## Astral

WTF

Oh dear, I don't agree with this... Tigers should not be kept as pets... 

for just a grand as well thats pretty much affordable to any old tom dick and harry.


----------



## Dizz

I wonder if they mean Toygers?


----------



## SiUK

Astral said:


> WTF
> 
> Oh dear, I don't agree with this... Tigers should not be kept as pets....


 
why shouldnt they? If someone has the correct set ups then its fine IMO


----------



## Shell195

I did wonder if they meant Toygers but the picture shows actual Tigers

This made me laugh

I have a litter of Three adorable Tiger cubs, all ready to meet new homeson sale.These cubs are the best i have ever seen as they have extra ordinary qualities that make them out standing when compared to other pets and animals. My cubs are AKC registered ,current on shorts and dewormmed records and are from *champion blood lines* and pedegree.They are very loving ,with good temparamnts and *love to play* *with kids and other house hold pets*.They are prespoiled with much love from our family . We shall be letting them go out with one year health quarantee to gether with all their health papers and ownership certificates and cites permits.We will be providing more informationat first conatct 


Ive never actually seen a Tiger Show :lol2: and how many people would actually let a Tiger play with kids and other household pets:whistling2:


----------



## angela__k__84

Dizz said:


> I wonder if they mean Toygers?


You still wouldn't register them with the Kennel Club :lol2:
It's just a total scam.
People who really wanna do this right will do their research and find the right people.
The thing is it may be unexpensive to buy one but it's sure expensive to set one up and obviously to keep a tiger you need a DWAL and the keepers and the proposed enclosure will be vetted. If someone can provide the correct environment then why not...


----------



## angela__k__84

Shell195 said:


> I did wonder if they meant Toygers but the picture shows actual Tigers
> 
> This made me laugh
> 
> I have a litter of Three adorable Tiger cubs, all ready to meet new homeson sale.These cubs are the best i have ever seen as they have extra ordinary qualities that make them out standing when compared to other pets and animals. My cubs are AKC registered ,current on shorts and dewormmed records and are from *champion blood lines* and pedegree.They are very loving ,with good temparamnts and *love to play* *with kids and other house hold pets*.They are prespoiled with much love from our family . We shall be letting them go out with one year health quarantee to gether with all their health papers and ownership certificates and cites permits.We will be providing more informationat first conatct
> 
> 
> Ive never actually seen a Tiger Show :lol2: and how many people would actually let a Tiger play with kids and other household pets:whistling2:


They are also current on their shorts :lol2:
Very fashionable tigers!


----------



## Renfield

It's a definite scam 

The photos were stolen from, I can't believe some people are this blatant :whip:

Google Image Result for http://www.oneinchpunch.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/tianjin-twin-tiger-cubs2.jpg

These Tigers were bred in China


----------



## Kirstyx

*love to play with kids and other house hold pets ---- yeah bet they do lol I dont agree with people keeping them as pets. An £1000 is way cheap!:gasp:*

*But I do think their the most beautiful animals on the planet!  I love tigers!*


----------



## LauraandLee

Scammers!!!!

They have been report it states -







Warning, please be wary of this advert as it has been reported by at least one user.


----------



## darloLee

SiUK said:


> why shouldnt they? If someone has the correct set ups then its fine IMO


and what if they dont have the correct set-up! all they need is a £1000 to get one as not all overseas laws state you must have a dwa licence etc. its f :censor:ig shocking!:devil:


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

bugger, i wonder if ive still got time to cancel that cheque........:whistling2:


----------



## SiUK

darloLee said:


> and what if they dont have the correct set-up! all they need is a £1000 to get one as not all overseas laws state you must have a dwa licence etc. its f :censor:ig shocking!:devil:


yeah I agree, but I dont think they shouldnt be kept by private keepers at all


----------



## angela__k__84

darloLee said:


> and what if they dont have the correct set-up! all they need is a £1000 to get one as not all overseas laws state you must have a dwa licence etc. its f :censor:ig shocking!:devil:


You can't exactly tar everyone with the same brush.
We can hardly control other countries who don't have a DWAL but in this country we do and anyone who wants to keeps a tiger, LEGALLY, in the UK has to follow very strict guidelines and if you are not following the guidelines, not doing it on the DWAL license and therefore not doing it legally it wouldn't matter whether people where "allowed" to keep them. 
Someone who is doing something illegally will find a way to do it whether it's advertised or not.
You are not "allowed" to buy and sell drugs but plenty of people find a way to do it - if you see the comparison I am making.
The people following the rules will give these animals a great life and normally contribute to conservation and captive breeding programs. 
The people who aren't following the rules would find a way to do it whether it was legal or not.
But, yeah, on topic - scam :lol2:


----------



## seasider

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> bugger, i wonder if ive still got time to cancel that cheque........:whistling2:


:lol2::lol2:


----------



## cmullins

SiUK said:


> why shouldnt they? If someone has the correct set ups then its fine IMO


yep i agree. yea there may be more in captivity but the ones in the wild are only going to be killed, when they run out in wild these in captivity will be very handy


----------



## Astral

Tigers can roam for hundreds of miles, hunt large wild game, and are threatened in the wild.

Nobody can create the right 'setup' in captivity. Not unless you personally own their natural habitat. These animals are not pets. The only way it can be considered acceptable in my opinion to keep these beautiful cats is if they are engaged in a breeding program for the good of the species.

Not for some random guy to go. "Look at me tiger pet shes called fluffy"


----------



## cmullins

Astral said:


> Tigers can roam for hundreds of miles, hunt large wild game, and are threatened in the wild.
> 
> Nobody can create the right 'setup' in captivity. Not unless you personally own their natural habitat. These animals are not pets. The only way it can be considered acceptable in my opinion to keep these beautiful cats is if they are engaged in a breeding program for the good of the species.
> 
> Not for some random guy to go. "Look at me tiger pet shes called fluffy"


 
hamsters roam miles of land in the wild!!!! iv never seen a cage that big
an no one is agruing about there cages


what animals do you keep astral? i bet their homes are not as big as where they live in the wild


----------



## gazza9inarow

Wow tiger cubs hey ,, thats Al pacino stuff ,, man .. apart from that its down right wrong ,,


----------



## angela__k__84

Astral said:


> Tigers can roam for hundreds of miles, hunt large wild game, and are threatened in the wild.
> 
> Nobody can create the right 'setup' in captivity. Not unless you personally own their natural habitat. These animals are not pets. The only way it can be considered acceptable in my opinion to keep these beautiful cats is if they are engaged in a breeding program for the good of the species.
> 
> Not for some random guy to go. "Look at me tiger pet shes called fluffy"


So you'd rather leave them to become extinct?
Fair enough :hmm:


----------



## cmullins

gazza9inarow said:


> Wow tiger cubs hey ,, thats Al pacino stuff ,, man .. apart from that its down right wrong ,,


 
why???


----------



## Astral

angela__k__84 said:


> So you'd rather leave them to become extinct?
> Fair enough :hmm:


 
Read it again....


----------



## Astral

cmullins said:


> hamsters roam miles of land in the wild!!!! iv never seen a cage that big
> an no one is agruing about there cages
> 
> 
> what animals do you keep astral? i bet their homes are not as big as where they live in the wild


 
The difference is a hamster has been to an extent domesticated

A tiger is a wild cat that should not be owned, its not just the size of it's enclosure but the morals of keeping such a large intelligent wild and free hunter in pointless captivity.

Breeding programs for the good of the species only in my opinion otherwise they should be right where they belong. In the wild.


----------



## bothrops

Astral said:


> The difference is a hamster has been to an extent domesticated
> 
> A tiger is a wild cat that should not be owned, its not just the size of it's enclosure but the morals of keeping such a large intelligent wild and free hunter in pointless captivity.
> 
> Breeding programs for the good of the species only in my opinion otherwise they should be right where they belong. In the wild.


 
I think the earlier point was just that - there is no wild left! 

..and ALL domesticated animals started out as wild caught animals that have now become 'used' to captivity. I agree that no WC tiger should ever be kept in captivity any more, except in the interests of the species as a whole (i.e. to increase genetic diversity within the captive population, or to look after the last remaining few WHEN it gets to that point) but do you believe that a CB tiger has any concept at all of 'the wild'? i.e. as soon as an animal is born into captivity it ceases to be a 'wild animal'.

That said, I have yet to see a truely great tiger enclosure (no doubt they are out there, but I'm yet to see one) and I have definitley seen some appauling ones.....


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

SiUK said:


> why shouldnt they? If someone has the correct set ups then its fine IMO


Just like a snake a tiger wouldnt forget years of instinct just because its a pet.

If pro zoo keepers get bit and hospitalised you wont stand a chance.

Plus they will do better in the wild, or at least a zoo or open space.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> So you'd rather leave them to become extinct?
> Fair enough :hmm:


 No offence but if their so endangerd, then i highly doubt you could breed them in captivity.

You could try, its got to be great fun changing their water and providing health checks on the cubs (if you can get them from the mum of course, good luck with that).

Oh and good luck finding vets. :gasp:


----------



## darloLee

SiUK said:


> yeah I agree, but I dont think they shouldnt be kept by private keepers at all


yeh true, but even if they put the price up so only truly committed keepers would buy them, but the price they go for now is way to cheap. 


angela__k__84 said:


> You can't exactly tar everyone with the same brush.
> We can hardly control other countries who don't have a DWAL but in this country we do and anyone who wants to keeps a tiger, LEGALLY, in the UK has to follow very strict guidelines and if you are not following the guidelines, not doing it on the DWAL license and therefore not doing it legally it wouldn't matter whether people where "allowed" to keep them : )
> Someone who is doing something illegally will find a way to do it whether it's advertised or not.
> You are not "allowed" to buy and sell drugs but plenty of people find a way to do it - if you see the comparison I am making.
> The people following the rules will give these animals a great life and normally contribute to conservation and captive breeding programs.
> The people who aren't following the rules would find a way to do it whether it was legal or not.
> But, yeah, on topic - scam :lol2:


i was talking about foreign laws concerning DWA not uk, i think its wrong that anyone can pay a little amount of cash and get a TIGER! i just think the law should be the same nationally as it is here, it would save alot of ill treated big cats abroad, 
: victory:


----------



## NBLADE

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> No offence but if their so endangerd, then i highly doubt you could breed them in captivity.
> 
> You could try, its got to be great fun changing their water and providing health checks on the cubs (if you can get them from the mum of course, good luck with that).
> 
> Oh and good luck finding vets. :gasp:


 
why do you doubt you could breed them in captivity? they are endangered in the wild due to over hunting and now lack of territory due to human infringement, breeding is not that difficult, and changing water and feeding is all perfectly safe and easy if the set up is good enough, you should ideally have 2 sections like in most zoos, that when the tigers are in one section you close of the other one and go in and clean it, sort out food, water etc, same with cubs, mum can be lured into the next section and then closed of from the cubs, just like they do in zoos,


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

NBLADE said:


> why do you doubt you could breed them in captivity? they are endangered in the wild due to over hunting and now lack of territory due to human infringement, breeding is not that difficult, and changing water and feeding is all perfectly safe and easy if the set up is good enough, you should ideally have 2 sections like in most zoos, that when the tigers are in one section you close of the other one and go in and clean it, sort out food, water etc, same with cubs, mum can be lured into the next section and then closed of from the cubs, just like they do in zoos,


I just wouldnt advice someone keeping a tiger as a pet, for obvious reasons.

I wouldnt feel safe going in to change their water, or to try to take the cub.

Ive heard storys of experts, that keep them in perfect natural habitats (accept the cage) and still getting savaged byt them.

I believe the fact that even a dog can bite when threatend or feels like it, definately increases your risk of getting bit. People who breed them are usually experts or bioligists, not just people who keep them as pets.

And i doubt i could recreat an indonesian or asian rainforest habitat in the middle of kent.


----------



## matty

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I just wouldnt advice someone keeping a tiger as a pet, for obvious reasons.
> 
> I wouldnt feel safe going in to change their water, or to try to take the cub.
> 
> Ive heard storys of experts, that keep them in perfect natural habitats (accept the cage) and still getting savaged byt them.
> 
> I believe the fact that even a dog can bite when threatend or feels like it, definately increases your risk of getting bit. People who breed them are usually experts or bioligists, not just people who keep them as pets.
> 
> And i doubt i could recreat an indonesian or asian rainforest habitat in the middle of kent.




& what about people who keep dwa snakes? They could kill them.

Or people who keep burms/retics etc? They could also kill them, & they don't need nay sort of license to keep them.

I don't see any problem whatsoever with keeping big cats as 'pets', as long as the owner knows the risk (& let's face it, it's pretty hard to not know that a tiger can kill you) & has a decent enclosure for the animal, all's good imo.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

matty said:


> & what about people who keep dwa snakes? They could kill them.
> 
> Or people who keep burms/retics etc? They could also kill them, & they don't need nay sort of license to keep them.
> 
> I don't see any problem whatsoever with keeping big cats as 'pets', as long as the owner knows the risk (& let's face it, it's pretty hard to not know that a tiger can kill you) & has a decent enclosure for the animal, all's good imo.


 I wouldnt buy a dwa snake either.

Why have a snake you cant hold, that only wants to kill you.

I dont think a tiger is quite the pet to cage up in your garden.

A) complaints

B) not many rescue centers will take them

C) if the neighbours cat gets to close.........

D) not being able to provide the cage, and possible escaping.

E) I cant find any care sheets.


----------



## gazz

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Only wants to kill you.


??:lol2:.Snakes don't want to kill you.There fangs + venom is a tool to catch dinner.Not for hunting down humans.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

gazz said:


> ??:lol2:.Snakes don't want to kill you.There fangs + venom is a tool to catch dinner.Not for hunting down humans.


 Sorry, owning a snake that could possibly kill you.

I was thinking when they always hiss and strike and stuff.


----------



## gazz

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Sorry, owning a snake that could possibly kill you.
> 
> I was thinking when they always hiss and strike and stuff.


More often than not when they hiss and strike at a large mammals'etc.They deliver a dry bite.They tag but don't deliver venom into the mammal'etc bitten.

But still venomus are not to be ownd willy'nilly.I'm hoping for the day they descover a non venomus cobra speices on a lost indo Island:lol2:.Does all a cobra does apart from put you in hospital or kill you:2thumb:.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Just like a snake a tiger wouldnt forget years of instinct just because its a pet.
> 
> If pro zoo keepers get bit and hospitalised you wont stand a chance.
> 
> Plus they will do better in the wild, or at least a zoo or open space.





C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> No offence but if their so endangerd, then i highly doubt you could breed them in captivity.
> 
> You could try, its got to be great fun changing their water and providing health checks on the cubs (if you can get them from the mum of course, good luck with that).
> 
> Oh and good luck finding vets. :gasp:





C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I just wouldnt advice someone keeping a tiger as a pet, for obvious reasons.
> 
> I wouldnt feel safe going in to change their water, or to try to take the cub.
> 
> Ive heard storys of experts, that keep them in perfect natural habitats (accept the cage) and still getting savaged byt them.
> 
> I believe the fact that even a dog can bite when threatend or feels like it, definately increases your risk of getting bit. People who breed them are usually experts or bioligists, not just people who keep them as pets.
> 
> And i doubt i could recreat an indonesian or asian rainforest habitat in the middle of kent.





C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I wouldnt buy a dwa snake either.
> 
> Why have a snake you cant hold, that only wants to kill you.
> 
> I dont think a tiger is quite the pet to cage up in your garden.
> 
> A) complaints
> 
> B) not many rescue centers will take them
> 
> C) if the neighbours cat gets to close.........
> 
> D) not being able to provide the cage, and possible escaping.
> 
> E) I cant find any care sheets.


 
It is clear from your posts Sam that you clearly miss understand a great deal about zoos and private collections.

ALL a zoo is is someones collection of animals. Who is looking after them? Humans! What do they need to do it? Three things

1) space
2) knowledge
3) money

Which of those do you think it is impossible for a private keeper to provide?

There is absolutely NO reason why private keepers can't own a tiger. There are many private collections around the UK involved with breeding endangered animals, high level conservation efforts, education etc, and many out shine a lot of the 'zoo's' around the country. The ONLY difference is that the 'zoo's' let the public in for a fee!

Admittedly that fee allows them to grow larger and provide for a larger variety of animals but the assumption that zoo = expert and private keeper = useless is farcical. (Random example, a zoo recently announced that they were the first *zoo* to ever to breed Rhino rat snakes - excellent except private keepers had been doing it for years. Another - very recently a private keeper on this very forum bred a very rare mammal for the first time anywhere in this country for 18 years!)


You have to be careful with your presumptions Sam.

Many zoos are filled to the brim with some of the most respected experts in the world, some are not.

Many private homes are not suitable to keep large predators, some are. In fact many private houses are more suited to keeping them in terms of room, attention, enclosure etc than the zoos.

A zoo tiger enclosure will need to be fitted into an available space, it will need to have a number of other compromises in order that the public can see properly from many angles and will be one of many thousands of other animals.

A private keeper is unlikely to have to make these compromises and as such is often capable of giving the animal a 'better home'.


I agree that I'm nervous at how cheap tigers are, but if you want to do it legally you will need a DWA. I don't know if you are aware of how they work, but it is not just a case of 'get a DWA and then you can keep ANY animal you like'. In fact a condition of the DWA is that you list exactly waht animals you have and you will only be granted the license if you can meet their needs.
An awful lot of people have the grand needed to buy the tiger but VERY FEW have the other £250,000 needed to construct the enclosure you would need to gain your DWA in order to legally own it. That's before you consider the food and vets bills (and yes Sam, believe it or not, you CAN get a vet for exotics (zoo's use them quite a bit you see!:whistling2.

Sorry, rambled on a bit there, but I hope it helps you see the bigger picture!

Cheers

Andy

p.s. there were some other things, but I've spent so long on this bit I've forgotten what they were!


----------



## SiUK

bothrops said:


> It is clear from your posts Sam that you clearly miss understand a great deal about zoos and private collections.
> 
> ALL a zoo is is someones collection of animals. Who is looking after them? Humans! What do they need to do it? Three things
> 
> 1) space
> 2) knowledge
> 3) money
> 
> Which of those do you think it is impossible for a private keeper to provide?
> 
> There is absolutely NO reason why private keepers can't own a tiger. There are many private collections around the UK involved with breeding endangered animals, high level conservation efforts, education etc, and many out shine a lot of the 'zoo's' around the country. The ONLY difference is that the 'zoo's' let the public in for a fee!
> 
> Admittedly that fee allows them to grow larger and provide for a larger variety of animals but the assumption that zoo = expert and private keeper = useless is farcical. (Random example, a zoo recently announced that they were the first *zoo* to ever to breed Rhino rat snakes - excellent except private keepers had been doing it for years. Another - very recently a private keeper on this very forum bred a very rare mammal for the first time anywhere in this country for 18 years!)
> 
> 
> You have to be careful with your presumptions Sam.
> 
> Many zoos are filled to the brim with some of the most respected experts in the world, some are not.
> 
> Many private homes are not suitable to keep large predators, some are. In fact many private houses are more suited to keeping them in terms of room, attention, enclosure etc than the zoos.
> 
> A zoo tiger enclosure will need to be fitted into an available space, it will need to have a number of other compromises in order that the public can see properly from many angles and will be one of many thousands of other animals.
> 
> A private keeper is unlikely to have to make these compromises and as such is often capable of giving the animal a 'better home'.
> 
> 
> I agree that I'm nervous at how cheap tigers are, but if you want to do it legally you will need a DWA. I don't know if you are aware of how they work, but it is not just a case of 'get a DWA and then you can keep ANY animal you like'. In fact a condition of the DWA is that you list exactly waht animals you have and you will only be granted the license if you can meet their needs.
> An awful lot of people have the grand needed to buy the tiger but VERY FEW have the other £250,000 needed to construct the enclosure you would need to gain your DWA in order to legally own it. That's before you consider the food and vets bills (and yes Sam, believe it or not, you CAN get a vet for exotics (zoo's use them quite a bit you see!:whistling2.
> 
> Sorry, rambled on a bit there, but I hope it helps you see the bigger picture!
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Andy
> 
> p.s. there were some other things, but I've spent so long on this bit I've forgotten what they were!


:2thumb: exactly


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Right by regular homes, are these just the average house you see in the street?, if so im sure the council will have something to do about it. I know if i was a parent i wouldnt want a tiger that could possibily escape near my family.

If you go into a reptile rescue center, you see hundreds of reptiles that cant be cared for, so i think if you coud get a tiger it would end up there. I saw an alligator in one cause some tard thought he could keep it in a bathroom. Its a tiger not a tameable pet.

The thing is is that if there are igunanas and geckos in rescue centers, then people cant even care for them let alone a tiger.

If you could show me a vet for tigers and big cats that would be appreciated. 

I doubt the zoo vets are going to come to a private breeders tiger, theyre zoo vets.

Thankfully for the obvious reasons, i rarely see people owning lions and tigers, in their back garden, you have to think in general the avarage person wouldnt have the needs or knowledege to own one, then when their big and nasty they panic.


----------



## SiUK

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Right by regular homes, are these just the average house you see in the street?, if so im sure the council will have something to do about it. I know if i was a parent i wouldnt want a tiger that could possibily escape near my family.
> 
> If you go into a reptile rescue center, you see hundreds of reptiles that cant be cared for, so i think if you coud get a tiger it would end up there. I saw an alligator in one cause some tard thought he could keep it in a bathroom. Its a tiger not a tameable pet.
> 
> The thing is is that if there are igunanas and geckos in rescue centers, then people cant even care for them let alone a tiger.
> 
> If you could show me a vet for tigers and big cats that would be appreciated.
> 
> I doubt the zoo vets are going to come to a private breeders tiger, theyre zoo vets.
> 
> Thankfully for the obvious reasons, i rarely see people owning lions and tigers, in their back garden, you have to think in general the avarage person wouldnt have the needs or knowledege to own one, then when their big and nasty they panic.


your barking up the wrong tree completely


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> If you could show me a vet for tigers and big cats that would be appreciated.
> 
> .


Jackson Green and Forster, Newport, Isle of Wight - Dr green is the vet for the Isle of Wight tiger sanctuary..... http://www.isleofwightzoo.com/animal_news.php?id=50


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

SiUK said:


> your barking up the wrong tree completely


It was related to tigers.

In my opinion it will always be not to keep these as pets.


----------



## SiUK

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> It was related to tigers.
> 
> In my opinion it will always be not to keep these as pets.


keeping them as pets doesnt mean someone keeping one in a small cage in the garden of their terraced house, DWA wouldnt allow it, in order to get a DWA you need appropriate sized cages with all the correct safety features, you could keep a big cat without ever having to touch or be in a cage with it, if you set up correctly.

Yes there are vets that treat zoo animals and the general public.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

pink said:


> Jackson Green and Forster, Newport, Isle of Wight - Dr green is the vet for the Isle of Wight tiger sanctuary..... News at the Isle of Wight Zoo


From what i read, their doing an enrichment programme, and their al their tigers.


But their their animals that their practicing on, if i brought one in they said nowhere that theyd help them.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Right by regular homes, are these just the average house you see in the street?, if so im sure the council will have something to do about it. I know if i was a parent i wouldnt want a tiger that could possibily escape near my family.
> 
> If you go into a reptile rescue center, you see hundreds of reptiles that cant be cared for, so i think if you coud get a tiger it would end up there. I saw an alligator in one cause some tard thought he could keep it in a bathroom. Its a tiger not a tameable pet.
> 
> The thing is is that if there are igunanas and geckos in rescue centers, then people cant even care for them let alone a tiger.
> 
> If you could show me a vet for tigers and big cats that would be appreciated.
> 
> I doubt the zoo vets are going to come to a private breeders tiger, theyre zoo vets.
> 
> Thankfully for the obvious reasons, i rarely see people owning lions and tigers, in their back garden, you have to think in general the avarage person wouldnt have the needs or knowledege to own one, then when their big and nasty they panic.


 
You're completely missing the point.

Yes there are irresponsible owners out there. That doesn't just apply to 'iguanas and geckos' but cats, dogs, hamsters, goldfish, are you suggesting that because there are dogs in rescue centres that no-one should be allowed to keep dogs? There millions of people that can and do keep and supply the needs for goldfish, dogs and cats. Thousands that can and do the same for reptiles amphibians and other exotics. There are also hundreds that could do similar for large mammals aswell, including predators. Just because AT EVERY LEVEL there are numpties that can't look after them properly does NOT mean that they shouldn't be kept at all.

Your 'families around who wouldn't want tigers escaping' arguement falls down when you think that there are 10's of thousands of people living VERY close to zoo's all around the country taking just that risk (Chester zoo was evacuated only a couple of weeks ago due to a troop of chimps getting into an insecure area of the zoo (i.e. they broke out into the keeper area of the enclosure not to the area where the public were). What makes you think the fences/gates etc that zoos use are any less secure than those that a private keeper would use?


As for 'zoo vets' - there are only a handful of zoos in this country that actually have a permanent vet on site. Most of the smaller zoos have local vets that do 'normal' vet work most of the time but specialise in or have a particualr interest in exotics and also 'cover' the zoo. That definitely happens at the animal collection that I work with. The local village vetinary practice are used. Admittedly we are a rural practise and the practise is an equine and agricultural specialist as well as domestics, but still - dogs one minute, the next he's in a field with me wrestling an emu to the ground or castrating our wallabies in the barn using a portable operating theatre. So yes, I could easily get a vet to look after my tigers needs.

You also talk about 'average houses' as if you think that I think that a two bedroomed semi in the middle of a housing estate is a suitable environment for a tiger. I clearly don't.

What I'm saying is that their is no reason why a private individual shouldn't be able to buy a tiger as a pet if they can look after it properly.


Cheers

Andy


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Perhaps, if it was CAPTIVE bred, It was a PRIVATE house, theres a MASSIVE enclosure, with LOADS of cover to make it as natural as possible.

NEVER ANY KIDS go near them.

Only then i might be okay with it.

by massive enclosure its got to be like a huge caged of bit of land.

How long does it take to learn how to care for them when even experts make mistakes and die.

Youve got to realise that i'm thinking this for the people and the tigers benefits here.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> From what i read, their doing an enrichment programme, and their al their tigers.
> 
> 
> But their their animals that their practicing on, if i brought one in they said nowhere that theyd help them.


Obviously you wouldn't 'bring one in', they would come to you! If you keep large predatory cats, you can't just stick them in a large cat carrier and make an appointment!
I would imagine that contacts and agreements with a suitable vetinarian would be a a condition of your DWA license.

Cheers

Andy


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Perhaps, if it was CAPTIVE bred,
> .


It was never suggested it would be anything else



C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> theres a MASSIVE enclosure, with LOADS of cover to make it as natural as possible.....
> .....by massive enclosure its got to be like a huge caged of bit of land.


....just like all the zoo's where, by your reckoning, it's OK to keep them?:whistling2:



C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> How long does it take to learn how to care for them when even experts make mistakes and die.
> .


The same length of time that the 'experts' at the zoo take! We're not talking superhumans here, or people that live seven lifetimes! They are just normal people that have read ALOT and learnt a lot from others. What makes you think that this is not possible by a private keeper? It's not magic that they use, or a secret club - zoo keepers just share information and read books. All this information is available to anyone as is the ability to talk to the other keepers!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> ....just like all the zoo's where, by your reckoning, it's OK to keep them?:whistling2:
> 
> 
> 
> !


 No only if they can have enclosures like the zoo's.

If not they shouldnt have them.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

: victory:Sorry everyone.


----------



## HABU

more tigers in america than anywhere... legal in my state...


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> No only if they can have enclosures like the zoo's.
> 
> If not they shouldnt have them.


 
I think you missed the irony there! I was trying to imply that the enclosure you described (massive, lots of cover, natural as possible) is VERY FAR from many zoos I have been to! I feel that many private keepers could actually provide BETTER enclosures than zoos can for the reasons outlined in other, earlier posts.

Cheers

Andy


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> : victory:Sorry everyone.


What on earth for?

We're on a forum, we debate things on forums, thats the point! I'm really enjoying the discussion. Please please don't apologies for your opinions!:2thumb:

Cheers

Andy


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> I think you missed the irony there! I was trying to imply that the enclosure you described (massive, lots of cover, natural as possible) is VERY FAR from many zoos I have been to! I feel that many private keepers could actually provide BETTER enclosures than zoos can for the reasons outlined in other, earlier posts.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Andy


Lol oh right yeah i missed it. 

Because the zoo's ive been to have been great, they have massive open grassland and trees.

im just a very very, opinionated person.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Lol oh right yeah i missed it.
> 
> Because the zoo's ive been to have been great, they have massive open grassland and trees.
> 
> im just a very very, opinionated person.


 
define 'massive'?


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> define 'massive'?


Im not good with measurements but it was huge.

Like this size, much better then a cage.


----------



## steve200

completely off point of the last few posts but has anyone seen the enclosure at the MGM in vegas.?

was there a few months ago and all the tigers there are captive breed and involved in a huge breeding programme.

the enclosure in the hotel and all the tigers/lions that are there are owned or funded by a "private keeper" he obviously employs trainers and keepers though.

my point basically being that he is a private keeper and its probably the best example of any animal/enclosure i have ever seen. definetly better than any zoo ive ever been too.


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> No offence but if their so endangerd, then i highly doubt you could breed them in captivity.
> 
> You could try, its got to be great fun changing their water and providing health checks on the cubs (if you can get them from the mum of course, good luck with that).
> 
> Oh and good luck finding vets. :gasp:


you dont have a clue, my vet deals with large cats!


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I just wouldnt advice someone keeping a tiger as a pet, for obvious reasons.
> 
> I wouldnt feel safe going in to change their water, or to try to take the cub.
> 
> Ive heard storys of experts, that keep them in perfect natural habitats (accept the cage) and still getting savaged byt them.
> 
> I believe the fact that even a dog can bite when threatend or feels like it, definately increases your risk of getting bit. People who breed them are usually experts or bioligists, not just people who keep them as pets.
> 
> And i doubt i could recreat an indonesian or asian rainforest habitat in the middle of kent.


can you recreate the natrual habitat of a hamster in kent...no, yo stick them in a cage, and dont give me the crap that they are domestic, they had to have started from somewhere


----------



## cmullins

matty said:


> & what about people who keep dwa snakes? They could kill them.
> 
> Or people who keep burms/retics etc? They could also kill them, & they don't need nay sort of license to keep them.
> 
> I don't see any problem whatsoever with keeping big cats as 'pets', as long as the owner knows the risk (& let's face it, it's pretty hard to not know that a tiger can kill you) & has a decent enclosure for the animal, all's good imo.


 
yes you have sumed it up in one


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> can you recreate the natrual habitat of a hamster in kent...no, yo stick them in a cage, and dont give me the crap that they are domestic, they had to have started from somewhere


 That whole they started out as wild is pointless.

They were once yes, but a very long time ago, now we have captive ones so the ones people own arent wild, so thats a pointless comment really.

And you can create a natural habitat, sawdust to recreate a nest for example. Or dry moss.

You cant create and indonesian or asian rainforest quite as easily in a garden.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> That whole they started out as wild is pointless.
> 
> They were once yes, but a very long time ago, now we have captive ones so the ones people own arent wild, so thats a pointless comment really.
> 
> And you can create a natural habitat, sawdust to recreate a nest for example. Or dry moss.
> 
> You cant create and indonesian or asian rainforest quite as easily in a garden.


..but you can quite easily create an adequate substitute in the same way we do with ALL our captive animals. The hamsters cage is a series of compromises that meet the animals percieved requirements. A suitable tiger cage is exactly the same. 

...and you're right, once the animal is in captivity it is no longer a wild animal whether it be a hamster, a goldfish or a lemur _or a tiger_!....


----------



## Lew

Astral said:


> WTF
> 
> Oh dear, I don't agree with this... Tigers should not be kept as pets...
> 
> for just a grand as well thats pretty much affordable to any old tom dick and harry.


If they are looked after properly its no different than keeping them in zoos ...


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> That whole they started out as wild is pointless.
> 
> They were once yes, but a very long time ago, now we have captive ones so the ones people own arent wild, so thats a pointless comment really.
> 
> And you can create a natural habitat, sawdust to recreate a nest for example. Or dry moss.
> 
> You cant create and indonesian or asian rainforest quite as easily in a garden.


why do u need to create a rain forest then?!?! if you can substatute like the hanster why cant you do the same with tiger, why do they need a rain forest, cause of all the zoos iv seen they dont look like rain forests!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> why do u need to create a rain forest then?!?! if you can substatute like the hanster why cant you do the same with tiger, why do they need a rain forest, cause of all the zoos iv seen they dont look like rain forests!


 What all the tigers you've seen didnt like rainforests. 

Most tigers like the asian ones for examples come from rainforests, so im pretty sure a rainforest tiger would love a rainforest.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> What all the tigers you've seen didnt like rainforests.
> 
> Most tigers like the asian ones for examples come from rainforests, so im pretty sure a rainforest tiger would love a rainforest.


No, I think he meant that they don't need a rainforest and that he as never seen a rainforest enclosure for a captive tiger, not that the tiger wouldn't like it.
: victory:


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> if you can substatute like the hanster why cant you do the same with tiger,


 Simple human capabilities, thats why.

An old lady would be able to buy a hamster with less knowledge, and be able to control it.

Whereas she wouldnt be able to control a tiger lol.

It doesent take alot of knowledge to care for a hamster you just kno already.

Whereas it would take years to learn for tigers.


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Simple human capabilities, thats why.
> 
> An old lady would be able to buy a hamster with less knowledge, and be able to control it.
> 
> Whereas she wouldnt be able to control a tiger lol.
> 
> It doesent take alot of knowledge to care for a hamster you just kno already.
> 
> Whereas it would take years to learn for tigers.


 
im not on about how simple or not it is to care for them, im saying that they dont need to live in a rain forest environment in captivitey.

and im sure they would like to live in a rain forest but im not arguing that, think!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jesus!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> im not on about how simple or not it is to care for them, im saying that they dont need to live in a rain forest environment in captivitey.
> 
> and im sure they would like to live in a rain forest but im not arguing that, *think!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jesus*!


 I know im just bringing up another interesting point, if most people can barey look after a hamster tahn a tigers a wrong choice.

And of cource they dont need a rainforest, just like i could keep a snake on newspaper but they sure woud love a rainforest.

Just like a BRB needs branches and humidity similar to what theryre habitat is. Just because a cat can tolerate not having a forest environment doesent make it alright.

And why take that tone with me, no one else is being rude, just you.


----------



## Dizz

So by this logic we're ok keeping dolphins in small pools just because we can?


----------



## bothrops

Dizz said:


> So by this logic we're ok keeping dolphins in small pools just because we can?


Nope.  That's not what is being said at all. What IS being said is that a private individual is just as capable of looking after a tiger as a zoo is and therefore it shouldn't be illegal for a private individual to keep one. How you define 'pet' is up to the individual! Also, it is being said that in order to successdully keep a tiger (or any other animal) in captivity you do not necessarily need to provide an exact replica of their habitat, but merely provide everything the animal needs to exhibit the five freedoms.

Cheers

Andy


----------



## JackieL

Sadly two words....

SCRUMPY BULLSHIT....

Jackie.


----------



## HABU

Tigers as Pets; Pet Tiger Care and Behavior


----------



## HABU

*How to Locate an Escaped Wild / Exotic Cat, by Richard Morris*


Of course, different breeds do behave somewhat differently once lost, but in general these ideas can be applied to all breeds. I hope you never have to experience a lost cat, but if it happens, if you take time to read this, you won't waste time on the typical, non productive ways folks seem to do. Time is very critical when searching. 
This is a real effective way to get a hidden cat to just walk out of the thin air and back into your arms. 
The most effective way to have a cat come out of hiding and respond to you and maybe just walk right up to you (believe me, you will not see the cat) is this simple method. 
The rattling of food (dry) in a sack, or even better is the dry treats in the cans you can buy. Shaking the treats in a can (I put Three Dog Bakery "Pity The Kitties" treats out of the cardboard box they come in into a can with a plastic lid. Of course, shaking it makes a lot of rattling noise. The cats, no matter where in the house, no matter what they are doing, come running immediately. 
This conditioning response is well known (ever hear of Pavlov's dogs?). You just won't get a better method of calling your cats if than if they are being tempted with their favorite treats. It is foolproof and extremely effective. 
If you think he will come to your calling him, keep at it. If not, get a portable spotlight and search the area at night. It will be a lot easier at night because he will be looking right at you and his eyes will reflect the light. Honestly, he may be scared to death and on the run. Walk your neighborhood and knock on each door. Show the pictures and chances are good that someone has seen him. Once you find a spotting you will know which direction he went. If he is in the woods and is declawed, he is in trouble as far as food goes. So he will be getting hungry. Shake a sack of food or something (like I said, rattle the food bowl). Any noise he recognizes will help him gain the courage to come out and be seen. My feeling is that he will lay low till dark. If he responds to a food bowl rattling or has a toy that makes noise try it everywhere. He will be hiding somewhere. 
So, I suggest that everyone whose cat has a chance of escaping, should add this can or rattling treats to the daily activities. It's actually fun for everyone, and may at some point save your cats life. (Keep in mind, this will probably work for the owners only, it's unlikely, a lost exotic is going to come up to any stranger). 
The rest of the ideas I have are to be used in conjunction with the above idea if possible. I was tailoring some of this to Servals traits as that was what had escaped. You will know the habits of your cat better than anyone else, so alter anything in this to your situation and your cats behavior. *Daytime things to do and what to do the first day.*


In the daytime, it's rare to have a lost cat willing to come out. Wait for dark to really walk and look in the area. Use the daylight hours to notify law enforcement or the appropriate agency (in some states you have as little as 1 hour to report the escape of a wild or exotic cat ). If you wait longer, you face being arrested or heavily fined. Document that you have met the legal requirements, get the name of every person you talk to as well as the time. It's very important to be able to prove you really did it. If you aren't up on the requirements, post a message on the yahoo groups. There are lots of folks that keep track of these things and will help you find out very quickly. 
If you feel comfortable with getting a TV station involved (this can have a lot of bad side effects), call the local Stations that have news. Most likely, they will be willing to help you by mentioning on the local news (be sure if you do this try to offer a reward). Be sure to take the station pictures of him and stress that he poses no danger to anyone, but if seen, call you not try to catch him. 
Do go to each of your neighbors and tell them to watch for the cat and give them a flyer that has a picture , description and your cell number and home number. Print out a good "lost Cat" flyer with a picture (color if possible) reward (it really helps) and several contact numbers. Color copies from Kinko's are very helpful. Be sure to put in the flyer to call, not try to capture. A reward, no matter how small will make an amazing difference. Money motivates people into becoming proactive members of your search team. Kids are usually willing to help with the promise of a reward and they will last longer than the older folks in a search. 
The second and 3rd days go talk to the neighbors again and see if anyone ever saw anything. Have more flyers on hand in case they saw it but had already pitched your first flyer. Unfortunately, after the 3rd day, if no one has seen the cat, it's probably on the move and no longer in your area. At that point, the sign method takes over. Personally, I had a lumber yard cut me a dozen 2 foot x 2 foot boards (1/8 inch masonite) and the stakes to mount the signs to 1/2" x 3" x 4 feet long with one end pointed to drive them into the ground. I used bright white paint with LOST CAT, REWARD clearly visible from a distance. small description and large phone numbers on the sign. I put them up every few blocks in my neighborhood. They ended up being the reason I got him back (near dead, 3 weeks later, but he was still my baby). Signs are not cheap but they remind people you are asking for help. Personally, I can never read the sheets of paper that people usually staple to phone poles. (and never get out of the car to read them). Save the signs once you find the cat in case it happens again. Cost per sign was around 3 dollars at that time. Putting the signs out should be done ASAP. Make time for it.


----------



## JackieL

Habu - you seen any?


----------



## bothrops

JackieL said:


> Sadly two words....
> 
> SCRUMPY BULLSHIT....
> 
> Jackie.


Come again?


Is this good or bad? Which side are you agreeing with? 

If you are going to post on a debate such as this, at least make it so we can understand WTF you are on about!:lol2:


----------



## angela__k__84

The problem seems to be here, Sam that you continue to refer to people keeping tigers in cages. As if someone is gonna cram one in a rabbit hutch.
The DWAL has minimum standards to be met. 230ft x 165ft is something like the recommended.
The likelihood of someone in a 3 bedroom end terrace having the space to attain these animals on the DWAL is extremely unlikely!
There are also miminum security precautions to be met.
The enclosure normally has to be buried in the ground, concreted, a certain height and made from a safe and suitable material.
I have to agree that a private keeper is more likely to provide one to one care and a more natural environment than a zoo. Rain forest or not I am pretty sure it is not mimicking the wild to have slack jawed kids staring in at them all day.
Many zoo vets will also visit private collection.
Just ask anyone on this site who keeps lemurs, coatis, wallabies.
At the end of the day tigers may be going for around a grand but if you do it legally on the DWAL it's gonna cost a bomb to set them up - probably more than most people's first house cost. If you don't do it legally on the DWAL then the simple fact is that you are breaking the law, and if someone is quite happy to break the law and keep a big cat without a DWAL they are gonna do it regardless of whether people advertise on the internet.


----------



## NaomiR

I think it's wrong to sell tigers to members of the public I think you should (at the very least) have a regulated lisencing body to control their welfare but then it could be argued that lots of animals we all own don't really belong in captivity :whistling2:


----------



## angela__k__84

NaomiR said:


> I think it's wrong to sell tigers to members of the public I think you should (at the very least) have a regulated lisencing body to control their welfare but then it could be argued that lots of animals we all own don't really belong in captivity :whistling2:


Um...that is what the DWAL is for...


----------



## NaomiR

.......which most people ignore when purchasing high exotics - sadly the majority of people either don't know they exist or they don't care the appeal of a baby tiger is greater, I see it all the time with puppy farms etc when people should really ask more questions but they don't


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Alot are going to end up dead or in care you know. With how easy it is to get a dwal. Whats going to appeal more to a little child, a tiger, or a goldfish?

Its for the animals benefit and well being that some animals just shouldnt be pets and kept.

And if you cant domesticate it?


----------



## angela__k__84

NaomiR said:


> .......which most people ignore when purchasing high exotics - sadly the majority of people either don't know they exist or they don't care the appeal of a baby tiger is greater, I see it all the time with puppy farms etc when people should really ask more questions but they don't


But if that is the case it wouldn't matter where there was - as you said - a regulating board.
People who are doing things illegally can not be regulated.
It is talking round in circles. There ARE regulations for people who do it right - and for people who don't do it right it is impossible to regulate!
Even if it were made illegal to keep big cats the people who are breaking the law by not having a DWAL would break the law by getting one...
You can't tar private keepers who ARE regulated by the DWAL with the same brush as irresponsible people who don't bother their arse about doing things the right way.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Alot are going to end up dead or in care you know. With how easy it is to get a dwal. Whats going to appeal more to a little child, a tiger, or a goldfish?
> 
> Its for the animals benefit and well being that some animals just shouldnt be pets and kept.
> 
> And if you cant domesticate it?


It is NOT easy to get a DWAL for a big cat.
Ask the guys in the venemous forum if it was easy/cheap for them to get their DWAL.
The license differs depending on the animal you wish to keep. You don't get a DWAL license that allows you to keep any old animal you please! You apply for the license for the particular animal. You are vetted, your enclosure is inspected by specialists. The breeder you are buying from is inspected, they even check you have a vet that is willing to treat your animal.
And it has NOTHING to do with what appeals to kids...the DWAL has a minimum age limit, you know...


----------



## stubeanz

angela__k__84 said:


> The problem seems to be here, Sam that you continue to refer to people keeping tigers in cages. As if someone is gonna cram one in a rabbit hutch.
> The DWAL has minimum standards to be met. 230ft x 165ft is something like the recommended.
> The likelihood of someone in a 3 bedroom end terrace having the space to attain these animals on the DWAL is extremely unlikely!
> There are also miminum security precautions to be met.
> The enclosure normally has to be buried in the ground, concreted, a certain height and made from a safe and suitable material.
> I have to agree that a private keeper is more likely to provide one to one care and a more natural environment than a zoo. Rain forest or not I am pretty sure it is not mimicking the wild to have slack jawed kids staring in at them all day.
> Many zoo vets will also visit private collection.
> Just ask anyone on this site who keeps lemurs, coatis, wallabies.
> At the end of the day tigers may be going for around a grand but if you do it legally on the DWAL it's gonna cost a bomb to set them up - probably more than most people's first house cost. If you don't do it legally on the DWAL then the simple fact is that you are breaking the law, and if someone is quite happy to break the law and keep a big cat without a DWAL they are gonna do it regardless of whether people advertise on the internet.


The best post throughout this thread ..... there ARE private keepers that keep big cats with license.... they do have exotic vets that treat them.....this is a scam and dont know why everyone is saying i think its wrong you can buy them because THIS IS A SCAM.....private keepers have and will continue to breed species that zoos havent bred (although doubt they breed tigers like dogs otherwise they would be everywhere).....the ammount of people in the uk with a tiger you would probably be able to count on 1 hand....if you can provide a zoo enviroment for the animal then why not keep it privately.... these are controled and monitored by DWAL and therefore DEFRA probably know where every big cat keeper lives.
stu


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> And it has NOTHING to do with what appeals to kids...the DWAL has a minimum age limit, you know...


 So when im older I decide to get a licence. I have a huge cage and a vet.

But I know sod all, i thought theyd be easy, who cares.

Not me but there are people out there who would do that, and it isnt good for the tigers.


----------



## scots_pine

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> So when im older I decide to get a licence. I have a huge cage and a vet.
> 
> But I know sod all, i thought theyd be easy, who cares.
> 
> Not me but there are people out there who would do that, and it isnt good for the tigers.


You sir, have tremendous gaps in knowledge and common sense. Do you think they just tick a couple of boxes? You NEED to know your stuff...YOU need to know your stuff.


----------



## angela__k__84

They would not let you have a DWAL if you know nothing. Let's not be silly here.
If you have found a breeder willing to sell to you, spent thousands building an enclosure and have found a suitable vet willing to treat a big cat you likely have done your research.
If you have a shed from Argos out the back and some guy willing to give your cat it's flu jab they will likely tell you where to go.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

scots_pine said:


> You sir, have tremendous gaps in knowledge and common sense. Do you think they just tick a couple of boxes? You NEED to know your stuff...YOU need to know your stuff.


 Why not. Clearly ive been told all i need is a large cage, and my home inspected.

Those could pass, then i could get one, and i couldnt handle it, and most likely it will die or get rehomed.

Im using this as an example, there are people with big houses and who have the space and vets, but dont know how to care for them.

And if it passes, then it can only go bad.


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Just because a cat can tolerate not having a forest environment doesent make it alright.
> 
> And why take that tone with me, no one else is being rude, just you.


 

............. so its not alright to keep any animal?


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> ............. so its not alright to keep any animal?


 Sorry should be more specific a TIGER.

A dog or cat can easily tolerate any habitat and be tamed and easily kept with minimal effort. A tigers more advanced.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Because people here love animals, they seem to think they can keep any animal and every animal. :gasp:


----------



## angela__k__84

I don't know where you have got the impression that it is easy to obtain a DWAL.
Ask anyone who has one and I bet you they will tell you it is a lot of work and a lot of expense. Ultimately people think it is worth it.
Noone, who knows nothing about these animals, is going to spend all that time and money to get a DWAL for a laugh. In fact I can't see how you could do all that work without LEARNING!
No one here thinks that tigers should be getting sold in pet shops but the very fact is they are not and WILL not end up that way.
In fact I would go so far as to say 99.999999999% of the ads for tigers, lions, monkeys that you see online are scams. Anyone stupid enough to answer one of these ads is gonna end up out of pocket, with no animal (thankfully) and hopefully a little wiser.
The people who really breed these animals do not need to advertise on the internet and the people who really do breed these animals would not sell them to you if you knew NOTHING!
You really are being very silly to make that comment. The council would not let you keep a DANGEROUS WILD ANIMAL if it is clear you know nothing.


----------



## stubeanz

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Because people here love animals, they seem to think they can keep any animal and every animal. :gasp:


 some people on this forum have kept animals like this and worked with animals like this, they could even be zoo keepers for big cats and therefore would know the ins and outs of big cat husbandry..... there are at least two people on this forum with big cats 
stu


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Sorry should be more specific a TIGER.
> 
> A dog or cat can easily tolerate any habitat and be tamed and easily kept with minimal effort. A tigers more advanced.


 
why is it ok too keep one and not the other. dog, can kill people as well as a tiger. its not about minimal effort if someone is going to buy a tiger, they will only get given a DWA if they meet requirements, of space, environment, and the knowledge side of things, so if you have got throught all that im suree you are commited to the welfare of the animal. its not hard to know that they require more effort to keep than a dog.

and have this argument with a zoo, and see what they say about your crap of keeping them in a rain forest environment


----------



## bothrops

angela__k__84 said:


> The problem seems to be here, Sam that you continue to refer to people keeping tigers in cages. As if someone is gonna cram one in a rabbit hutch.
> The DWAL has minimum standards to be met. 230ft x 165ft is something like the recommended.
> The likelihood of someone in a 3 bedroom end terrace having the space to attain these animals on the DWAL is extremely unlikely!
> There are also miminum security precautions to be met.
> The enclosure normally has to be buried in the ground, concreted, a certain height and made from a safe and suitable material.
> I have to agree that a private keeper is more likely to provide one to one care and a more natural environment than a zoo. Rain forest or not I am pretty sure it is not mimicking the wild to have slack jawed kids staring in at them all day.
> Many zoo vets will also visit private collection.
> Just ask anyone on this site who keeps lemurs, coatis, wallabies.
> At the end of the day tigers may be going for around a grand but if you do it legally on the DWAL it's gonna cost a bomb to set them up - probably more than most people's first house cost. If you don't do it legally on the DWAL then the simple fact is that you are breaking the law, and if someone is quite happy to break the law and keep a big cat without a DWAL they are gonna do it regardless of whether people advertise on the internet.


I feel you may be wasting your breath Angela. You have summarised all my points well and yet it appears that none of what has been said has been taken on board at all!




NaomiR said:


> I think it's wrong to sell tigers to members of the public I think you should (at the very least) have a regulated lisencing body to control their welfare but then it could be argued that lots of animals we all own don't really belong in captivity :whistling2:


Have you read any of the post at all? Myself and others have spent 10 pages carefull explaining that there is a regulatory body and it is no more wrong to sell tigers to members of the public than it is to sell gerbils. Obviously there has to regulation (hence the DWAL) but to claim that tigers shouldn't be owned by private collectors and yet they are ok in zoos has no logical basis.




NaomiR said:


> .......*which most people ignore when purchasing high exotics *- sadly the majority of people either don't know they exist or they don't care the appeal of a baby tiger is greater, I see it all the time with puppy farms etc when people should really ask more questions but they don't





C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> *Alot are going to end up dead or in care you know.* With how easy it is to get a dwal. Whats going to appeal more to a little child, a tiger, or a goldfish?
> 
> Its for the animals benefit and well being that some animals just shouldnt be pets and kept.
> 
> And if you cant domesticate it?


Myself, Angela, SiUK and others have spent a lot of time carefully explaining how captive animals are kept, their requirements, the regulations in keeping them and all of the problems with your arguements based on fact and a high level of experience in this field.

It is clear that both of you have strong FEELINGS that tigers shouldn't be kept as pets, but unfortunately, like it or lump it, it is very hard to justify that opinion and still feel you should be allowed to keep other animals as pets. Your own opinion on where the line should be drawn (you can keep this animal, you can't keep this one) is based purely on your own perception of 'joe public'. Whilst you may not be able to provide for a tiger, and your percieved idea of joe public may not, that doesn't mean that there are not people out there that can and why should they not be able to keep them because you percieve them to be incapable based on your own 'field of vision'?

Both of you have just made sweeping statements based purely on you personal opinion and I think thats a little (not quite the right word but) 'lazy'. We have spent a lot of time trying to explain all the reasons that your personal feelings can't override the logic of captive animals in general and can't be 'speciest' regarding the animals that can or can't be kept.

Unless you can substantiate the claims that I have highlighted in bold then they are irrelevant in the debate as they are based on personal ideas of what you think may happen and not on fact!



The original post was a scam advert, yet captive bred tigers have been available to the public for years (Hell, you used to be able to buy them in Harrods!) and yet despite this, all the horror stories you are describing/ implying such as people not tolerating a nieghbour having one, or them all escaping and eating all the children on the estate, or them killing all there owners or them all ending up in rescue centres ARE NOT HAPPENING so what does that tell you?

It tells you that those that are serious about keeping a tiger as a 'pet' are not only able to but they are doing so and you are none the wiser as they are doing it correctly.

Occasionally someone who shouldn't have one, gets hold of one but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be kept at all after all plenty of dogs, cats and hamsters end up with inappropiate owners every week......


----------



## angela__k__84

bothrops said:


> *I feel you may be wasting your breath Angela. You have summarised all my points well and yet it appears that none of what has been said has been taken on board at all!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you read any of the post at all? Myself and others have spent 10 pages carefull explaining that there is a regulatory body and it is no more wrong to sell tigers to members of the public than it is to sell gerbils. Obviously there has to regulation (hence the DWAL) but to claim that tigers shouldn't be owned by private collectors and yet they are ok in zoos has no logical basis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Myself, Angela, *Astral* and others have spent a lot of time carefully explaining how captive animals are kept, their requirements, the regulations in keeping them and all of the problems with your arguements based on fact and a high level of experience in this field.
> 
> It is clear that both of you have strong FEELINGS that tigers shouldn't be kept as pets, but unfortunately, like it or lump it, it is very hard to justify that opinion and still feel you should be allowed to keep other animals as pets. Your own opinion on where the line should be drawn (you can keep this animal, you can't keep this one) is based purely on your own perception of 'joe public'. Whilst you may not be able to provide for a tiger, and your percieved idea of joe public may not, that doesn't mean that there are not people out there that can and why should they not be able to keep them because you percieve them to be incapable based on your own 'field of vision'?
> 
> Both of you have just made sweeping statements based purely on you personal opinion and I think thats a little (not quite the right word but) 'lazy'. We have spent a lot of time trying to explain all the reasons that your personal feelings can't override the logic of captive animals in general and can't be 'speciest' regarding the animals that can or can't be kept.
> 
> Unless you can substantiate the claims that I have highlighted in bold then they are irrelevant in the debate as they are based on personal ideas of what you think may happen and not on fact!
> 
> 
> 
> The original post was a scam advert, yet captive bred tigers have been available to the public for years (Hell, you used to be able to buy them in Harrods!) and yet despite this, all the horror stories you are describing/ implying such as people not tolerating a nieghbour having one, or them all escaping and eating all the children on the estate, or them killing all there owners or them all ending up in rescue centres ARE NOT HAPPENING so what does that tell you?
> 
> It tells you that those that are serious about keeping a tiger as a 'pet' are not only able to but they are doing so and you are none the wiser as they are doing it correctly.
> 
> Occasionally someone who shouldn't have one, gets hold of one but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be kept at all after all plenty of dogs, cats and hamsters end up with inappropiate owners every week......


I know! :lol2: I think I need to give up.
Although - Astral is against keeping Wild animals. Even though she has animals herself. Don't want to upset her by including her with all us terrible people!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

cmullins said:


> why is it ok too keep one and not the other. dog, can kill people as well as a tiger. its not about minimal effort if someone is going to buy a tiger, they will only get given a DWA if they meet requirements, of space, environment, and the knowledge side of things, so if you have got throught all that im suree you are commited to the welfare of the animal. its not hard to know that they require more effort to keep than a dog.
> 
> and have this argument with a zoo, and see what they say about your crap of keeping them in a rain forest environment


 Yes zoo keepers should. But people could pass the inspections and get one. Only zoo keepers, If they do make these legal to keep by anyone then can you not see why they shouldnt be kept?

But youd still say the same why shouldnt people keep them. How many would have to die or be rehomed before people saw these should be wild animals. Granted the captive ones should remain in the zoo's. And if you cant rehome it.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Because people here love animals, they seem to think they can keep any animal and every animal. :gasp:


...and who are you exactly to decide what animals people are and are not allowed to keep? Just because some animals are more difficult or more expensive to keep does not mean that they are impossible to keep, or that they shouldn't be kept.

Where is your line Sam?

Dogs, cats, goldfish = OK

Tigers, lions, bears = not OK?

If so, what about lynx? cougar? caracal? Geoffroys fishing cat? red panda? lemur? primates? scottish wildcat? weasel? badger? raccoon?.....

I choose that list carefully as it contains a number of cats of different sizes - what is your 'criteria' for 'yes you can keep that one' 'no you can't keep that one? - also their are other predators there of different sizes, there are animals that need enormous amounts of commitment, money and expertise.....why could I not provide those things as well as or better than a zoo?


----------



## HABU

JackieL said:


> Habu - you seen any?


 
there are a few locally that people keep... i've never been to see them... they made the news a few times in the past few years... getting loose and things... we don't have DWA or restrictions other than local ones...

in most places in my state, you just buy one like a dog... keep it secure... no inspections or laws on the books... our laws generally are concerned with livestock issues... disease and all... nothing on big cats... no laws=no enforcement.

you find or buy a critter here it's just your business generally... if there is a problem then other laws can be applied... public nusiance stuff.

people have them in ohio... nothing wrong with it if they are willing to do what is necessary to have one healthy, happy and safe...

we have a lot of farms here... and many tiger keepers are very dedicated... some are yahoos... very different than there in the u.k.


----------



## bothrops

angela__k__84 said:


> I know! :lol2: I think I need to give up.
> *Although - Astral is against keeping Wild animals. Even though she has animals herself. Don't want to upset her by including her with all us terrible people*!


Editted - my apologies Astral! - mis read a post as I was checking back!

Cheers

Andy


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> ...and who are you exactly to decide what animals people are and are not allowed to keep? Just because some animals are more difficult or more expensive to keep does not mean that they are impossible to keep, or that they shouldn't be kept.
> 
> Where is your line Sam?
> 
> Dogs, cats, goldfish = OK
> 
> Tigers, lions, bears = not OK?
> 
> If so, what about lynx? cougar? caracal? Geoffroys fishing cat? red panda? lemur? primates? scottish wildcat? weasel? badger? raccoon?.....
> 
> I choose that list carefully as it contains a number of cats of different sizes - what is your 'criteria' for 'yes you can keep that one' 'no you can't keep that one? - also their are other predators there of different sizes, there are animals that need enormous amounts of commitment, money and expertise.....why could I not provide those things as well as or better than a zoo?


Well think about it, if they do become legal and anyone could get hold of one it wont end well. Some should just be left wild.

There are some that could pass and get one and then regret it when theyre decapitated.


----------



## HABU

bothrops said:


> ...and who are you exactly to decide what animals people are and are not allowed to keep? Just because some animals are more difficult or more expensive to keep does not mean that they are impossible to keep, or that they shouldn't be kept.
> 
> Where is your line Sam?
> 
> Dogs, cats, goldfish = OK
> 
> Tigers, lions, bears = not OK?
> 
> If so, what about lynx? cougar? caracal? Geoffroys fishing cat? red panda? lemur? primates? scottish wildcat? weasel? badger? raccoon?.....
> 
> I choose that list carefully as it contains a number of cats of different sizes - what is your 'criteria' for 'yes you can keep that one' 'no you can't keep that one? - also their are other predators there of different sizes, there are animals that need enormous amounts of commitment, money and expertise.....why could I not provide those things as well as or better than a zoo?


 
you didn't get the memo?

... he's the "decider".... it's good to be king i suppose...


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

HABU said:


> you didn't get the memo?
> 
> ... he's the "decider".... it's good to be king i suppose...


 Can you not see how it would do the animal better in a zoo or the wild.

Rather then anyone being able to just up and become a private keepr?


----------



## angela__k__84

I don't think there is anything left to say. 
Many people are putting forward well thought out and informed points of view and others are being closed minded and misinformed.
I personally would never keep a tiger but if I was ever lucky enough to have the land - in an appropriate area - I would love to keep a red fox! (Which btw I am already researching. Don't know if I will ever have the land but I find it interesting none the less, and I think you will find that is what most GENUINE keepers share - a genuine interest)
Quick - get the pitchforks!


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Yes zoo keepers should. But people could pass the inspections and get one. Only zoo keepers, If they do make these legal to keep by anyone then can you not see why they shouldnt be kept?
> 
> But youd still say the same why shouldnt people keep them. How many would have to die or be rehomed before people saw these should be wild animals. Granted the captive ones should remain in the zoo's. And if you cant rehome it.


Again, I find myself repeating myself!

Why is a 'zoo keeper' anymore or less qualified than any other member of the public? People who know very little about animal husbandry get to be zoo keepers. As soon as I am employed as one I'm alright to have a pet tiger?

OK, I hear you, that's absurd.....it's only experienced zoo keepers that can have one...........again, the goal posts shift to fit your percieved ideals of a suitable owner.

Why is a very well read, well researched and well experienced member of the public not allowed to keep, yet a 'zoo keeper' is? Just because they are an 'ordinary citizen' does not make them less suitable.

If you do not know how to look after one YOU WILL NOT GET YOUR LICENSE! You will not 'pass' just because you can build a big cage, although you will have to in order to pass.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Well think about it, if they do become legal and anyone could get hold of one it wont end well. Some should just be left wild.
> 
> There are some that could pass and get one and then regret it when theyre decapitated.


Sam, it is LEGAL to keep big cats.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> Don't know if I will ever have the land but I find it interesting none the less, and I think you will find that is what most GENUINE keepers share - a genuine interest)
> Quick - get the pitchforks!


 Is having an opinion wrong. Im not wrong in the way that that not owing them would be for the best.

The zoo knows what to do, or leave them in their natuarl environment, rather then stress them out. You know animals in the wild would do better off then anyone being able to get the right stuff then keep one.


----------



## Cat&Dean

I think you guys who are extremley knowledgable and experienced are banging your heads against brick walls here. What started as a very good debate has gone a bit long winded with ppl not reading the info properly and not actually taking in whats being said. I feel sorry for most of the big cats in my zoo, which is about 5 miles away and uses a local vet btw. The cats there pace around and look really sad. If i owned a massive estate and was loaded i think the big cats would be much happier there, where they can be more themselves, i.e elusive and private, not beong stared at all day long but there you go!!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> Why is a 'zoo keeper' anymore or less qualified than any other member of the public? .


 Really you dont know why.

Okay I know nothing about keeping tigers, but I get one if they were legal and i had the space.

Not hard to see why now is it. There will be people who just grab a pet on impulse knowing nothing about them.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Is having an opinion wrong. Im not wrong in the way that that not owing them would be for the best.


Well, not owning them will end up with them extinct.
Is that better?

As has been stated time and time again (and I may point out you haven't answered) what makes a zoo keeper any better than a private keeper?
Zoo keepers follow the guidelines of keeping. As would a private owner. It's not like zoo keepers have some magical wonderful insight that a private keeper won't have. They are - after all - human.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Really you dont know why.
> 
> Okay I know nothing about keeping tigers, but I get one if they were legal and i had the space.
> 
> Not hard to see why now is it. There will be people who just grab a pet on impulse knowing nothing about them.


You are just not listening.
They ARE legal!
You NEED a license!
YOU won't get a license - as you know "nothing"!
Anyone else who know's "nothing" will not get a license!
It's not as simple as nipping down the corner shop for a packet of raisin poppets!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> Well, not owning them will end up with them extinct.
> Is that better?
> 
> As has been stated time and time again (and I may point out you haven't answered) what makes a zoo keeper any better than a private keeper?
> Zoo keepers follow the guidelines of keeping. As would a private owner. It's not like zoo keepers have some magical wonderful insight that a private keeper won't have. They are - after all - human.


 How will it make them extinct. Nature has survived years on its own. What you need to do is arrest or kill the hunters not trap the animals.

Breeding by experts helps, but then anyone can get them if thye have the right requirements, and that isnt good.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> You are just not listening.
> They ARE legal!
> You NEED a license!
> YOU won't get a license - as you know "nothing"!
> Anyone else who know's "nothing" will not get a license!
> It's not as simple as nipping down the corner shop for a packet of raisin poppets!


And you couldnt just learn the basics real quick.

If you kno what they eat, their habitat and proper managment then there isnt much else surely. Thats not enough to care for a tiger.

If babys get strangled by DOMESTICATED pythons, then a tiger isnt the way to go.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Well think about it, if they do become legal and anyone could get hold of one it wont end well. Some should just be left wild.
> 
> There are some that could pass and get one and then regret it when theyre decapitated.


 
AAArrggghhh! You're not reading anything are you?

It IS legal, anyone CAN go out and buy one and they have been able to for YEARS.



C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Can you not see how it would do the animal better in a zoo or the wild.
> 
> Rather then anyone being able to just up and become a private keepr?


We have explained OVER and OVER why the zoo is not necessarily any better than a private keeper. How are you able to miss this?




How is the wild better than captivity? In your head 'captivity for an animal = jail for a human'. It takes away their freedom.....

Unfortunaltely for your head/heart the REALITY is very different

.....the animal (a) has no preception of 'freedom' and (b) when in 'The wild' is spending all day, every day living on the very edge of survival, barely getting enough to eat, constantly having to defend its bit of space from all the other animals after the food on it, disease, parasites, rivals, fights......

whereas in captivity the animal gets interaction, a health service, free food (as much as it likes, perfectly taliored to meet it's every need) entertainment (it is law to provide a captive animal with suitable enrichment), freedom from premature death, fighting for territory etc etc


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> How will it make them extinct. Nature has survived years on its own. What you need to do is arrest or kill the hunters not trap the animals.
> 
> Breeding by experts helps, but then anyone can get them if thye have the right requirements, and that isnt good.


Are you kidding me?!
It is estimated there are about 5,000- 7,000 wild tigers in the world.
About 7% of what used to exist 100 years ago!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> AAArrggghhh! You're not reading anything are you?
> 
> It IS legal, anyone CAN go out and buy one and they have been able to for YEARS.


 Then thats the problem.


----------



## HABU

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Can you not see how it would do the animal better in a zoo or the wild.
> 
> Rather then anyone being able to just up and become a private keepr?


 
what's a zoo?... people keeping animals in captivity... a private zoo, a public zoo... a guy with a mess of animals?... what's a zoo?

and the wild? they're about gone in the wild...


----------



## angela__k__84

HABU said:


> what's a zoo?... people keeping animals in captivity... a private zoo, a public zoo... a guy with a mess of animals?... what's a zoo?
> 
> and the wild? they're about gone in the wild...


Yep :notworthy:


----------



## SWMorelia

angela__k__84 said:


> As has been stated time and time again (and I may point out you haven't answered) what makes a zoo keeper any better than a private keeper?
> Zoo keepers follow the guidelines of keeping. As would a private owner. It's not like zoo keepers have some magical wonderful insight that a private keeper won't have. They are - after all - human.


John Aspinall was probably one person you would of thought shouldn't keep big cats.... With his background.....
Yet a small collection of animals grew into a zoo and then the John Aspinall Foundation....
So private keeper or zoo.... It's a close line...


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

HABU said:


> and the wild? they're about gone in the wild...


 Whats the reason for this?


----------



## angela__k__84

Hunting, loss of habitat, lack of prey.
Things they wouldn't experience in captivity.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> How will it make them extinct. Nature has survived years on its own. What you need to do is arrest or kill the hunters not trap the animals.
> 
> Breeding by experts helps, but then anyone can get them if thye have the right requirements, and that isnt good.


Policing and protecting them in their natural environment costs millions and makes nothing.

Keeping them in captivity costs thousands and makes thousands in revenue from sales and visitors etc etc and also raises the profile of the plight of those still out there.

Sam, I feel you are completely out of touch with reality. 



C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> And you couldnt just learn the basics real quick.
> 
> If you kno what they eat, their habitat and proper managment then there isnt much else surely. Thats not enough to care for a tiger.
> 
> If babys get strangled by DOMESTICATED pythons, then a tiger isnt the way to go.


That middle sentence is rediculous! If that knowledge you have listed is not enough to care for a tiger then you don't have enough knowledge to gain the license! You are implying that the professionals giving out the licenses will ask basic information that you can get from the childrens encyclopedia of animals and then give you a license!

If you haven't got the knowledge required you can't keep one! That's the whole point!


:bash:

Andy
p.s pythons are not domesticated, and as stated a thousand times before, how does domesticated = safe?


----------



## HABU




----------



## bothrops

HABU said:


>


:lol2: and :notworthy:


----------



## angela__k__84

Hahaha!
I ACTUALLY lol'ed.
I think this thread has run it's course.
Let's go elsewhere


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Then thats the problem.


 
??????????????????????


You've spent 11 pages saying how it shouldn't be legal and explaining why, yet now you want to say the problem is that it is legal?

The point is that all of your arguements were based on what the consquences of it being legal would be. It IS legal and that doesn't happen AKA your point is invalid!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> That middle sentence is rediculous! If that knowledge you have listed is not enough to care for a tiger then you don't have enough knowledge to gain the license! You are implying that the professionals giving out the licenses will ask basic information that you can get from the childrens encyclopedia of animals and then give you a license!
> 
> If you haven't got the knowledge required you can't keep one! That's the whole point!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy
> p.s pythons are not domesticated, and as stated a thousand times before, how does domesticated = safe?


 Pythons can be domesticated, they are intellgent so they can. Tamed if you like then.

That indicates my point, if someone can get hold of a licence and aanswer the tiger knowledge quiz or whatever, then they can do what they want.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> ??????????????????????
> 
> 
> You've spent 11 pages saying how it shouldn't be legal and explaining why, yet now you want to say the problem is that it is legal?
> 
> The point is that all of your arguements were based on what the consquences of it being legal would be. It IS legal and that doesn't happen AKA your point is invalid!


 No the problem is that it is legal, you said anyone can get these licences.

So thats the problem.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Whats the reason for this?


 Habu I would like this answered please.


----------



## angela__k__84

Matey - you just contradicted yourself.


C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Just like a snake a tiger wouldnt forget years of instinct just because its a pet.
> Plus they will do better in the wild, or at least a zoo or open space.


It's all fine and well having an opinion but really your's seems barely formed and often contradicting of itself.
Also, it's more often the intelligent animals that can't be tamed.
No one is claiming they want to keep a tame tiger.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Pythons can be domesticated, they are intellgent so they can. Tamed if you like then.
> 
> That indicates my point, if someone can get hold of a licence and aanswer the tiger knowledge quiz or whatever, then they can do what they want.


Absolute rubbish!

"Pythons can be domesticated, they are intellgent so they can (*so tigers are stupid? - your basic biology lesson should explain the difference between a reptilian and mammalian brain...... *). Tamed if you like then" 

"That indicates my point, if someone can get hold of a licence and aanswer the tiger knowledge quiz or whatever, then they can do what they want"

No, it doesn't indicate your point, it shows you are talking rubbish. If someone has the knowledge then they are capable regardless of whether they are a member of the public, a 'zoo keeper' or the Queen of Sheeba. If they don't have the knowledge then they can't keep the animal.


.....:gasp:


----------



## SWMorelia

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> That indicates my point, if someone can get hold of a licence and answer the tiger knowledge quiz or whatever, then they can do what they want.


But if they prove they know about Tigers and can prove they have the facility to keep one, then surly they are the right people to own one????
It's not like they are giving them out to 18 yo chavs on the 11th floor of a council block, is it??


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Habu I would like this answered please.


Also, I answered that.
Tigers are becoming extinct due to hunting, loss of habitat and lack of prey.
Things they would not experience in captivity.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Habu I would like this answered please.





angela__k__84 said:


> *Hunting, loss of habitat, lack of prey.*
> Things they wouldn't experience in captivity.





bothrops said:


> *Policing and protecting them in their natural environment costs millions and makes nothing*.


 
You're winding us up right?


----------



## Cat&Dean

Sam, are u actually saying that you dont know why Tigers are struggling in the wild??????????????????????? And almost extinct?????????????


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> Also, I answered that.
> Tigers are becoming extinct due to hunting, loss of habitat and lack of prey.
> Things they would not experience in captivity.


 Then why cage up the tigers. Surely theyre the ones needing a punishing.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Then why cage up the tigers. Surely theyre the ones needing a punishing.


It's a bit too late for that.
Also, I have no power to punish anyone.
And they people destroying their habitat sure aren't gonna stop cos I ask them to.
So, in my humble opinion, rather than let them die out - which with approx. 7000 left in the wild won't take long - I think captive breeding programs by dedicated private keepers who devote an amazing amount of time and money to these animals is a fantastic idea.
By the time I have grandkids it's unlikely tigers will exist in the wild but that doesn't mean I don't think my grandkids shouldn't get to experience these amazing beasts.


----------



## HABU

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Then why cage up the tigers. Surely theyre the ones needing a punishing.


 are you Boidae?? or his brother?


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> It's a bit too late for that.
> Also, I have no power to punish anyone.
> And they people destroying their habitat sure aren't gonna stop cos I ask them to.
> So, in my humble opinion, rather than let them die out - which with approx. 7000 left in the wild won't take long - I think captive breeding programs by dedicated private keepers who devote an amazing amount of time and money to these animals is a fantastic idea.
> By the time I have grandkids it's unlikely tigers will exist in the wild but that doesn't mean I don't think my grandkids shouldn't get to experience these amazing beasts.


 What??????????

Not you the police, they can punish. It seems more the right thing to do.

If not they need to try harder. But let the experts do the breeding then let them keep them. Cant help thinking this way.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

HABU said:


> are you Boidae?? or his brother?


What are you on about??

If the tigers get killed and theyre habitat destroyed, then why shouldnt they be punished.

Who should they cage up, the poachers, or the tigers?

Keep in mind the tigers done nothing wrong.

I thought you iked boidae anyway. We were the only ones mate.


----------



## angela__k__84

Tigers have been hunted to near extinction.
Even if the "police" could catch 90% of the people hunting them they would still be extinct within 50 years.
Not to mention loss of habitat - which also affects their ability to eat - as their prey are dying out too.


----------



## SWMorelia

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> If not they need to try harder. But let the experts do the breeding then let them keep them. Cant help thinking this way.


I should imagine that this has been asked earlier in the thread. Do you keep any animals?
I assume the answer is yes...
What gave you the right to own them.... You didn't have to pass any test to prove you were suitable...
So will you now give up keeping your animals??


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

SW-morelia said:


> I should imagine that this has been asked earlier in the thread. Do you keep any animals?
> I assume the answer is yes...
> What gave you the right to own them.... You didn't have to pass any test to prove you were suitable...
> So will you now give up keeping your animals??


 The average person can look after a dog much easier without the fear of the animla dying or themselves dieing.

I assume were all talking about average people being able to look after them and buy them. If so then i still think this way.

If not i apologise for wasting your time.


----------



## angela__k__84

Depends what you mean by average person.
Someone in the street who's never done a bit of reading in their lives could quiet easily provide terrible conditions for a dog, cat, snake, hedgehog or tiger.
Someone who has a genuine interest and has done a lot of research can provide for any of these animals.
It doesn't take a super hero.
Just a sensible person, with some knowledge, and the finances to provide.
How many times do you see dogs and cats in absolutely appalling states, often dying or near to death due to some humans treatment.
People like that shouldn't be allowed any animal. Be it a goldfish or a tiger.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

I meen like me, I can look after a dog safely, but not a tiger.

People like that shouldnt, as much as they love them.


----------



## angela__k__84

Why can you look after a dog safely?


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Its not hard, You dont need much research to look after one.

Whereas a tiger youd need much more experience.


----------



## angela__k__84

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> *Its not hard, You dont need much research to look after one.
> *
> Whereas a tiger youd need much more experience.


I bet there are loads of people on this forum that would disagree with what you just said there.
Personally, I wouldn't advocate anyone getting an animal they hadn't thoroughly researched.
Be it large or small.
A dog can be dangerous too you know...


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> I bet there are loads of people on this forum that would disagree with what you just said there.
> Personally, I wouldn't advocate anyone getting an animal they hadn't thoroughly researched.
> Be it large or small.
> A dog can be dangerous too you know...


 Thye can be domesticated. They dont attack for no reason, you have to be nasty and provoke them.
I also said much research. They pretty much adapt and dont need much, just a big garden exercise and food and water.


----------



## Cat&Dean

The average person does not have a tiger.:bash:


----------



## cmullins

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Can you not see how it would do the animal better in a zoo or the wild.
> 
> Rather then anyone being able to just up and become a private keepr?


 
why a difference between a private keeper and the zoo?? im a private keeper, what the problem with me then hey?!

so dont take the p:censor:ss


----------



## NBLADE

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Thye can be domesticated. They dont attack for no reason, you have to be nasty and provoke them.
> I also said much research. They pretty much adapt and dont need much, just a big garden exercise and food and water.


 
they dont attack for no reason, a tiger wont attack for no reason, a dog may attack if you enter its territory, same with a tiger, a dog may attack if you have food, same with a tiger, a dog may attack if it feels threatend etc etc, if you actually research and learn how to look after a tiger you will have no problems, and you can safely look after a tiger without ever needing to go into the cage with it, so never putting yourself in any position to be attacked, you have seperate enclosures, which you can close of, so when the tiger is closed of in the indoor section of its enclosure you can work on the outside, and vice versa. 

the zoo keepers that have been attacked by tigers are the few that go in with them, like the big cat park in new zealend, most people don't need to do this, tigers could have a better enclosure provided by a private keeper then a zoo, why couldn't they? say a tiger enclosure at a zoo was 100ft by 300ft, many people in the uk could easily provide that space and more, and its not like everyone can go out and buy a tiger, you would need a dwa so people wpuld inspect your cage and ability to look after the animal before your license was issued anyway


----------



## Ruthy

Astral said:


> WTF
> 
> Oh dear, I don't agree with this... Tigers should not be kept as pets...
> 
> for just a grand as well thats pretty much affordable to any old tom dick and harry.


Well then if thats true, i wish i was any old tom dick and harry.... :whistling2:


----------



## cmullins

Ruthy said:


> Well then if thats true, i wish i was any old tom dick and harry.... :whistling2:


lol dont we all:lol2:


----------



## ryanr1987

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Thye can be domesticated. They dont attack for no reason.


 That's not true some dogs like german shepherds are timid unless work is put in from a young age but can still remain timid and bite in fear and they have been known to just lunge at people without warning.


----------



## LoveForLizards

ryanr1987 said:


> That's not true some dogs like german shepherds are timid unless work is put in from a young age but can still remain timid and bite in fear and they have been known to just lunge at people without warning.


Yes, that is called fear aggresion. That is not biting for no reason. :whistling2:


----------



## gazz

NBLADE said:


> A dog may attack if you have food,


A Tiger may attack coz it see's *you* as food:lol2:.Not just if you have food:Na_Na_Na_Na:.

Anyway on joking aside anyone can own a Tiger if you have one thing *common sense*.If you have *common sense* you will do and have all that it needed to own a Tiger with a high percent of safty.

If you don't have *common sence*.It will likly be the only and last animal you'll ever own :diablo:.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

gazz said:


> A Tiger may attack coz it see's *you* as food:lol2:.Not just if you have food:Na_Na_Na_Na:.
> 
> Anyway on joking aside anyone can own a Tiger if you have one thing *common sense*.If you have *common sense* you will do and have all that it needed to own a Tiger with a high percent of safty.
> 
> If you don't have *common sence*.It will likly be the only and last animal you'll ever own :diablo:.


I think you need more then common sense.

Thats what everyones saying, you need lots of knowledege about the animal or you cant have it, so common sense isnt enough.

Common sense could just be "dont poke it''. :lol2:

I have **** sense to own a dog, so i have common sense, so should I own a tiger??


----------



## gazz

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I think you need more then common sense.
> 
> Thats what everyones saying, you need lots of knowledege about the animal or you cant have it, so common sense isnt enough.


If you had common sence you would do all that.That is a part of common sence.Know you animal and know it well.If you didn't do what you wrote you have no common sence.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

gazz said:


> If you had common sence you would do all that.That is a part of common sence.Know you animal and know it well.If you didn't do what you wrote you have no common sence.


 Oh thats what you meant lol.

I thought just like basic knowledge.


----------



## gazz

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Oh thats what you meant lol.
> 
> I thought just like basic knowledge.


Basic knowledge never that only gets you so far.As in tiger eats meat.And oh yea! DON'T POKE IT:lol2:.


----------



## cmullins

well after this convo, i feeling like putting a tiger on my land lol


----------



## NBLADE

gazz said:


> A Tiger may attack coz it see's *you* as food:lol2:.Not just if you have food:Na_Na_Na_Na:.
> 
> Anyway on joking aside anyone can own a Tiger if you have one thing *common sense*.If you have *common sense* you will do and have all that it needed to own a Tiger with a high percent of safty.
> 
> If you don't have *common sence*.It will likly be the only and last animal you'll ever own :diablo:.


 
very true :lol2:

but a pack of dogs could see you as food, if african hunting dogs tackle wilderbeast a human would seem an easier meal :whistling2::lol2:


----------



## stubeanz

mods please shut this thread its going round and round in circles debate is good but mmmmmmmyyyyyyyy bbbbbbrrrrrraaaaaaiiiiiiiinnnnnn. this is gona carry on an on until its shut so save us all and stop this please!


----------



## bothrops

stubeanz said:


> mods please shut this thread its going round and round in circles debate is good but mmmmmmmyyyyyyyy bbbbbbrrrrrraaaaaaiiiiiiiinnnnnn. this is gona carry on an on until its shut so save us all and stop this please!


What a rediculous notion!

Why lock it? No-one is being abusive or nasty, we're just discussing things, disagreeing on certain points and then discussing things further.

It had died until you bought it to the top of the list.:roll: If your that bothered by the thread...here's an idea...DON'T READ IT!

Just for that I'm going to start it again......




Sam, could you please specifically answer this post for me as it was missed in the general discussion....



bothrops said:


> ...and who are you exactly to decide what animals people are and are not allowed to keep? Just because some animals are more difficult or more expensive to keep does not mean that they are impossible to keep, or that they shouldn't be kept.
> 
> Where is your line Sam?
> 
> Dogs, cats, goldfish = OK
> 
> Tigers, lions, bears = not OK?
> 
> If so, what about lynx? cougar? caracal? Geoffroys fishing cat? red panda? lemur? primates? scottish wildcat? weasel? badger? raccoon?.....
> 
> I choose that list carefully as it contains a number of cats of different sizes - what is your 'criteria' for 'yes you can keep that one' 'no you can't keep that one? - also their are other predators there of different sizes, there are animals that need enormous amounts of commitment, money and expertise.....why could I not provide those things as well as or better than a zoo?


 
Cheers

Andy


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Well think about it, if they do become legal and anyone could get hold of one it wont end well. Some should just be left wild.
> 
> There are some that could pass and get one and then regret it when theyre decapitated.


 I did answer it andy. Thats where the lines drawn.


----------



## Astral

Oh this ones popped up again has it.

I think some people are just going to have to agree to disagree! At least we still live in a country where you can express different opinions. Freedom of speech!

This thread hasn't turned nasty at any point so keep it going if people still want to debate.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Were all going to have opinions of what can and cannot be pets.

I just have a different one is all. And i'm not offended.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I did answer it andy. Thats where the lines drawn.


 
???

Neither your post nor the quoted post answer it at all.

I have listed a large number of species/groups. Which ones *specifically *would you consider suitable for being kept by a private keeper (as 'pets' if you like) and which would you consider only suitable for zoos?


Cheers

Andy


----------



## nattat

i think in one way they are better as pets if you know what you are doing. i was in a lizzard shop and somone said they belong in the wild!! well with people killing their homes and taking the food i think not, we are doing a lot of them favours.
its ok to have taken cats,dogs and birds etc all them years ago so why not??


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

nattat said:


> its ok to have taken cats,dogs and birds etc all them years ago so why not??


 Because we have captive ones now.

Theres no need to anymore.


----------



## angela__k__84

I actually can't believe this is still going on! :lol2:
What is left to be said?

EDIT - except that, Sam, you are still saying IF it becomes legal to keep them, as has been stated many times - it IS legal!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

angela__k__84 said:


> EDIT - except that, Sam, you are still saying IF it becomes legal to keep them, as has been stated many times - it IS legal!


 Only with a licence. And i havent carried that on now.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Because we have captive ones now.
> 
> Theres no need to anymore.



No, but thousands of years ago dogs, cats and parrots were taken from the wild, is that OK in your books?

Is it acceptable in your books to keep birds of prey?


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> No, but thousands of years ago dogs, cats and parrots were taken from the wild, is that OK in your books?
> 
> Is it acceptable in your books to keep birds of prey?


Yeah but now theres no need to take wild ones. Theyve been breeded there are plenty of captive animals. So why buy a wild one.

Or catch a wild one.

Birds of prey spend days sometimes flying wild before being whistled back. And have to have alot of exersize. So their pretty much wild.
You cant take a tiger for exersize down the park. 

And im pretty sure you can get captive bred birds of prey.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Yeah but now theres no need to take wild ones. Theyve been breeded there are plenty of captive animals. So why buy a wild one.
> 
> Or catch a wild one.
> 
> Birds of prey spend days sometimes flying wild before being whistled back. And have to have alot of exersize. So their pretty much wild.
> You cant take a tiger for exersize down the park.
> 
> And im pretty sure you can get captive bred birds of prey.


1. Agreed. There is no need to take wild "dogs".
2. Yes you can get CB birds of prey, we happen to have 5 of them. :lol2:


----------



## bothrops

Why have we gone to 'taking animals from the wild?' That was never the arguement. The arguement was whether tigers should be kept as pets, not whether we should take wild ones and keep them in our bedroom!


...and you STILL haven't answered my question!

Cheers

Andy

p.s. I doubt any captive bird of prey spends 'days' flying around......


----------



## .D.o.m.i.n.o.

Most people can be scared of tigers,but i guess its the same with snakes ect,but you wont go to a reptile shop if your scared of snakes,but you can exacally hide away from a tiger if someone was taking it for a walk..
I dunno about this,it wud be nice but unless someone was trained ect for thier temperment and such then it would be very very crazy to keep a tiger,i couldnt imagine myself keeping one lol.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> p.s. I doubt any captive bird of prey spends 'days' flying around......


 You can, it depends how experienced the bird is.

Remeber you can let pigeons go for weeks sometimes months. so a falcon would have no trouble.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> You can, it depends how experienced the bird is.
> 
> Remeber you can let pigeons go for weeks sometimes months. so a falcon would have no trouble.


The only time you would leave a falcon, or any bird of prey for that matter, flying for days at a time would be on a wild hack. And for future reference, birds of prey are a VERY different ball game to pigeons, falcons have been known to be out for 4 days and become wild in that short amount of time, that is why we have telemetry. Any respectable falconer would not leave a bird out in a field purposely to leave them to fly for days at a time (except obviously as for mentioned, for hacking purposes).


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> The only time you would leave a falcon, or any bird of prey for that matter, flying for days at a time would be on a wild hack. And for future reference, birds of prey are a VERY different ball game to pigeons, falcons have been known to be out for 4 days and become wild in that short amount of time, that is why we have telemetry. Any respectable falconer would not leave a bird out in a field purposely to leave them to fly for days at a time (except obviously as for mentioned, for hacking purposes).


 Right..So a pigeon can fly long but a falcon cant??


----------



## superpanda

i always thought you need a dwa for a tiger:2thumb:


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Right..So a pigeon can fly long but a falcon cant??


I never said that did I? Sounding a bit hasty!
A falcon can fly for a few miles before landing if it wants to and if it is a fit bird however no falconer who knew what they were doing would leave a falcon in a field purposely other then for hacking, because the bird will become practically wild and un-trappable.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> I never said that did I? Sounding a bit hasty!
> A falcon can fly for a few miles before landing if it wants to and if it is a fit bird however no falconer who knew what they were doing would leave a falcon in a field purposely other then for hacking, because the bird will become practically wild and un-trappable.


 Ferrets dont.

You can let them go, underground and that, they'll always come back.

Plus you can strap trakkers on falcons legs.


----------



## bothrops

Sam.

I'm sorry mate, but I can't hold my tongue any longer.

How old are you? Do you purposely ignore most of people responses and then post obscure and nonsensical posts on purpose or do you genuinely struggle to understand basic English and grammer?

I don't mean to be rude, really I don't, but I can't help but feel you are either purposely avoiding the actually questions submitted or genuinely don't understand what is being asked or said.

I will try one more time, as this thread has already gone on a very odd tangent (due, in no small part to yourself).


Which animals, out of the ones I listed (twice) would you consider suitable for people to have as 'pets' and which do you think should only be kept in zoos?

(and please don't post that they should all be in the wild as we covered that about seven pages ago)

Yours frustratingly

Andy


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

bothrops said:


> Sam.
> 
> I'm sorry mate, but I can't hold my tongue any longer.
> 
> How old are you? Do you purposely ignore most of people responses and then post obscure and nonsensical posts on purpose or do you genuinely struggle to understand basic English and grammer?
> 
> I don't mean to be rude, really I don't, but I can't help but feel you are either purposely avoiding the actually questions submitted or genuinely don't understand what is being asked or said.
> 
> I will try one more time, as this thread has already gone on a very odd tangent (due, in no small part to yourself).
> 
> 
> Which animals, out of the ones I listed (twice) would you consider suitable for people to have as 'pets' and which do you think should only be kept in zoos?
> 
> (and please don't post that they should all be in the wild as we covered that about seven pages ago)
> 
> Yours frustratingly
> 
> Andy


I have answered I wouldnt recommend a tiger as a pet end of.

I do understand grammar and can spell so that was pointless to say. And I wasn't the one starting the other topics.

If you carry on I will just ignore answering them okay. These are opinions, so Me and you aren't really answering anything. Who are you to say whats best and why people can own tigers. You cant be sure what they want unless you are a tiger.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Ferrets dont.
> 
> You can let them go, underground and that, they'll always come back.
> 
> Plus you can strap trakkers on falcons legs.


Ferrets don't what?
Nothing is saying ferrets will always come back, it is a risk we run for the sport. Ferrets don't have a homeing instinct, if they find a nest or a young/dead rabbit underground, they will sit, eat it then more often then not lay up for aprox. 3 hours when they need the toilet and maybe then they will come up to see if you are still there, we do however put trackers (Ferret finders) on them to try and stop this from happening. 

Yes, we can put trackers (Telemetry, as previously mentioned) on falcons but things happen and falcons can't always be tracked because of how far they can travel in a short amount of time. Not that this is anything to do with the original question. 
*THANK YOU for your alarming display of incompitence. *


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Who are you to say whats best and why people can own tigers. You cant be sure what they want unless you are a tiger.


Who are you to say what*'*s best and why people can't own tigers *?*
You can*'*t be sure what they want unless you are a tiger.


----------



## bothrops

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I have answered I wouldnt recommend a tiger as a pet end of.
> 
> I do understand grammar and can spell so that was pointless to say. And I wasn't the one starting the other topics.
> 
> If you carry on I will just ignore answering them okay. These are opinions, so Me and you aren't really answering anything. Who are you to say whats best and why people can own tigers. You cant be sure what they want unless you are a tiger.


 
And yet again, you fail to answer my question. 

I have listed a range of animals that may or may not be kept as pets and I am really interested to find out which of them you consider as suitable as pets. Clearly you have your line somewhere. It is obvious that you believe 'tiger' is a no no, and as you are on a reptile forum I assume you keep some sort of exotic pet. Therefore I am merely trying to comprehend where your boundaries lie.

I will write out the list again so all you need to do is quote this post and then write 'pet' or 'not pet' or even 'yes' and 'no' next to each animal to let me know exactly where your boundaries are when it come to people keeping exotic animals as pets.

Dogs
cats
goldfish
hamster
cornsnake
burmese
retic
wc rough green snake
skunk
meercat
marmoset
lynx
cougar
caracal
Geoffroys fishing cat
red panda
chimpanzee
capuchin
lemur
primates
scottish wildcat
weasel
badger
raccoon
Tigers
lions
bears


Please, please, please answer this question as, despite the fact that you belive you have, you have not done so so far.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> Ferrets don't what?
> Nothing is saying ferrets will always come back, it is a risk we run for the sport. Ferrets don't have a homeing instinct, if they find a nest or a young/dead rabbit underground, they will sit, eat it then more often then not lay up for aprox. 3 hours when they need the toilet and maybe then they will come up to see if you are still there, we do however put trackers (Ferret finders) on them to try and stop this from happening.
> 
> Yes, we can put trackers (Telemetry, as previously mentioned) on falcons but things happen and falcons can't always be tracked because of how far they can travel in a short amount of time. Not that this is anything to do with the original question.
> *THANK YOU for your alarming display of incompitence. *


 Have you ever been ferreting?

They always come back. Thats what you do release them underground and they get the rabbits. Everyone ferreting does this, or they put a trakker on them.

Ive done it loads of times and let them go for ages, they love it, its what they do. And ive never had one run away.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> Who are you to say what*'*s best and why people can't own tigers *?*
> You can*'*t be sure what they want unless you are a tiger.


 As apposed to a random person keeping them in cages in their garden, near kids neighbiurs and traffic.

The answer should be clear.


----------



## MamaBelle

bit like the adds i've seen for golden lion tamarins and squirrel monkeys.
how it works (and i know cos they do it with dogs to) is you reply interested cos their local (london or whatever)
then they email saying their moving to america for work and you can have the animal for free but they are currently kept on the isle of man or scotland or whatever and you'll have to pay for the courier!

then ask you to pay them to sort it out and ask for hundreds of pounds!

Preumably it works or they wouldn't bother surely!

Bunch of numpties!


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Have you ever been ferreting?
> 
> They always come back. Thats what you do release them underground and they get the rabbits. Everyone ferreting does this, or they put a trakker on them.
> 
> Ive done it loads of times and let them go for ages, they love it, its what they do. And ive never had one run away.


Yes I have been ferreting loads of times in all kinds of styles.
In all honesty mate it's questionable whether you have been ferreting. 
Ferrets wont "always" come back, I know how to ferret thanks, and they certainly dont go and "get the rabbits" nor does "everyone ferreting" do that. Ferreting is using ferrets to bolt rabbits into nets or for the gun, NOT so the ferret catches the rabbit. I mainly ferret for the birds, but have also done proper ferreting and ferreting under the gun. 
Ferrets are only used in hunting to bolt a rabbit be it for birds, dog, gun or netting. A ferret that catches a rabbit and manages to take it down is, in most ferreters books, a useless ferreter.

A working ferret will go underground, clear the burrows as much as is possible and come back up to ground once no rabbits are bolting, a big burrow (lets say, 20 pot) should take at the most 30 minutes to clear and bag a fair few rabbits, any longer then 45 minutes and we track and more often then not a ferret has layed up. That ferret is then put back into the box/bag and left there for the rest of the trip depending on what permission we are on.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> Yes I have been ferreting loads of times in all kinds of styles.
> In all honesty mate it's questionable whether you have been ferreting.
> Ferrets wont "always" come back, I know how to ferret thanks, and they certainly dont go and "get the rabbits" nor does "everyone ferreting" do that. Ferreting is using ferrets to bolt rabbits into nets or for the gun, NOT so the ferret catches the rabbit. I mainly ferret for the birds, but have also done proper ferreting and ferreting under the gun.
> Ferrets are only used in hunting to bolt a rabbit be it for birds, dog, gun or netting. A ferret that catches a rabbit and manages to take it down is, in most ferreters books, a useless ferreter.
> 
> A working ferret will go underground, clear the burrows as much as is possible and come back up to ground once no rabbits are bolting, a big burrow (lets say, 20 pot) should take at the most 30 minutes to clear and bag a fair few rabbits, any longer then 45 minutes and we track and more often then not a ferret has layed up. That ferret is then put back into the box/bag and left there for the rest of the trip depending on what permission we are on.


Thats the difference then you ferret for birds.

I am right, you will rarely loose them, they just go under chase the rabbit out.

Maybe its just your ferrets cause no one else ive known to go ferreting ever have these problems.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Thats the difference then you ferret for birds.
> 
> I am right, you will rarely loose them, they just go under chase the rabbit out.
> 
> Maybe its just your ferrets cause no one else ive known to go ferreting ever have these problems.


As I said earlier, I have ferreted in all different styles, whether ferreting for birds, gun, dog or netting it makes no difference, it's all the same practice.
These are considered common problems when you ferret as consistently and with as many ferrets as we have.


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

am i gettin this right, caveman you dont think tigers should be kept in captivity cos theyre wild animals? n when its put to you that dogs n cats were taken from the wild once, you say theres no need to take them from the wild anymore cos theres enough in captivity? wouldnt that apply to tigers in the future? so at some point every animal has to be taken from the wild in order to build up a number of them to breed in captivity, and then in ex amount of years just like you say about dogs now there will be no need to take tigers from the wild as there will be enough in captivity............

or am i completely on the wrong lines? <<Scratches head>>


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

Who should breed them?

Pro's and animal scientists, zoo's. Or someone who just got a licence?

Seems safer to go with the scientists.

And just because animals were once taken from the wild is not an exuse.


----------



## murph3010

LoveForLizards said:


> As I said earlier, I have ferreted in all different styles, whether ferreting for birds, gun, dog or netting it makes no difference, it's all the same practice.
> These are considered common problems when you ferret as consistently and with as many ferrets as we have.


 
I hope this sam is only winding you up because he has no clue about falconry or ferreting ! i agree with everything you have said on the subject 

Sam get a grip son you havnt got a clue!


----------



## LoveForLizards

murph3010 said:


> I hope this sam is only winding you up because he has no clue about falconry or ferreting ! i agree with everything you have said on the subject
> 
> Sam get a grip son you havnt got a clue!


I think I love you. :notworthy:


:lol2:


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

murph3010 said:


> I hope this sam is only winding you up because he has no clue about falconry or ferreting ! i agree with everything you have said on the subject
> 
> Sam get a grip son you havnt got a clue!


Havent a clue?

When everyone who go's ferreting never has these problems and looses them.

I have got a clue, its just bad luck when people lose them and a one off.

But Ive let my ferrets go loads of times when rabbiting, and never once, nor has anyone else had a problem with it. They dont stay down there ok. They chase out the rabbit, and if they did they always come out anyway, they arent going to saty down for ever.

Theres no need panicking everytime a ferret doesent come out. :bash:

Its just your ferrets then.


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Who should breed them?
> 
> Pro's and animal scientists, zoo's. Or someone who just got a licence?
> 
> Seems safer to go with the scientists.
> 
> And just because animals were once taken from the wild is not an exuse.


so its perfectly acceptable to take one animal from the wild and not another is it?? thats the point...... i find it a little hypocritical. why is it acceptable to put a rabbit in a hutch, a beardie in a wooden viv, a snake in a rub!! but yet tigers are wild animals that shouldnt be kept? thats laughable.
as for breedin them, so long as requirements are met and a person is suitable, knows their stuff etc etc in the future they could be bred by people who have a licence not just in a zoo


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> so its perfectly acceptable to take one animal from the wild and not another is it?? thats the point...... i find it a little hypocritical. why is it acceptable to put a rabbit in a hutch, a beardie in a wooden viv, a snake in a rub!! but yet tigers are wild animals that shouldnt be kept? thats laughable.
> as for breedin them, so long as requirements are met and a person is suitable, knows their stuff etc etc in the future they could be bred by people who have a licence not just in a zoo


 Im not breeding snakes, but there are already captive snakes so i dont need to.

Its not laughable when someone dies is it, or it escapes. Would you rather someone with experience breeding them, or not?


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Im not breeding snakes, but there are already captive snakes so i dont need to.
> 
> Its not laughable when someone dies is it, or it escapes. Would you rather someone with experience breeding them, or not?


you just cant get the point can you....... there are captive snakes because they were taken from the wild n bred in captivity!!! they came from the wild initially!!!!! 
as for someone dyin..... dogs kill people, they have done in the past and they will in the future, so should people stop breedin them ? should they be returned to the wild n not kept? how do people gain experience from breedin things?? people have to start somewhere n the first breeders of snakes didnt have experience of breedin them before they started breedin them did they??? everyone has to start somewhere with all animals when beginnin to breed them


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> there are captive snakes because they were taken from the wild n bred in captivity!!! they came from the wild initially!!!!!


 And you cant get the point that that isnt an exuse.

Snakes dont need to come form the wild anymore because they are already in captivity.


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> And you cant get the point that that isnt an exuse.
> 
> Snakes dont need to come form the wild anymore because they are already in captivity.


 

:bash: and in 10-20 years time we will probably be sayin " tigers dont need to come from the wild because they were bred in captivity" 

get it?

ps snakes are still taken from the wild and im sure will continue to do so


----------



## murph3010

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Havent a clue?
> 
> When everyone who go's ferreting never has these problems and looses them.
> 
> I have got a clue, its just bad luck when people lose them and a one off.
> 
> But Ive let my ferrets go loads of times when rabbiting, and never once, nor has anyone else had a problem with it. They dont stay down there ok. They chase out the rabbit, and if they did they always come out anyway, they arent going to saty down for ever.
> 
> Theres no need panicking everytime a ferret doesent come out. :bash:
> 
> Its just your ferrets then.


 
Listen sonshine what you have typed on here clearly shows you as someone who has never been ferreting properly in any real way and may have played at it like alot of little boys do. Ferreting, purse netting, shooting over them and flying hawks over them are all things i do on a regular basis and i only want people that come on this thread or any others you write on the subject of ferrets or Birds of Prey to know what you type is utter c r a p and should be ignored!


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> :bash: and in 10-20 years time we will probably be sayin " tigers dont need to come from the wild because they were bred in captivity"
> 
> get it?


 Yes apart from the fact that they already are.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

murph3010 said:


> Listen sonshine what you have typed on here clearly shows you as someone who has never been ferreting properly in any real way and may have played at it like alot of little boys do. Ferreting, purse netting, shooting over them and flying hawks over them are all things i do on a regular basis and i only want people that come on this thread or any others you write on the subject of ferrets or Birds of Prey to know what you type is utter c r a p and should be ignored!


 Its not though.

Maybe you do something wrong then if yoou loose your ferrets.
I shoot and hunt. And if your saying that you shouldnt let a ferret go underground cause your scared it wont come back, then your the one typing CRAP.


----------



## bothrops

Any chance you're going to answer my question Sam?


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Yes apart from the fact that they already are.


 
so what the feck you arguin about then? theyre not bred in captivity to the point that its acceptable obviously though is it.....you still protest that it isnt right that tigers should be taken from the wild...... i can totally respect that opinion from someone who doesnt own a single animal and never will, but seen as you are on an animal forum i assume you have got one or two.....which believe it or not originated way back when.......... from where? you guessed it, the WILD!

<<continues to bang head against brick wall>>


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> so what the feck you arguin about then? you still protest that it isnt right that tigers should be taken from the wild...... i can totally respect that opinion from someone who doesnt own a single animal and never will, but seen as you are on an animal forum i assume you have got one or two.....which believe it or not originated way back when.......... from where? you guessed it, the WILD!
> 
> <<continues to bang head against brick wall>>


 Are you going to use that every time. They originated from the wild. Its ridiculous.

I have lots of animals actually, chickens ducks dogs cats snakes. and probably more when i can afford it.

Im arguing because your saying people are still taking wild tigers. When i just said there already are captive ones.


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Its not though.
> 
> Maybe you do something wrong then if yoou loose your ferrets.
> I shoot and hunt. And if your saying that you shouldnt let a ferret go underground cause your scared it wont come back, then your the one typing CRAP.


Are you for real? :lol2:



bothrops said:


> Any chance you're going to answer my question Sam?


I was thinking the same thing...


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> Are you for real? :lol2:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yep you must just have bad luck.

Do you put your ferrets underground? when rabbiting. Yes then whats the problem. It aint my fault you cant keep hold of them.


----------



## bothrops

OK, time out.

Sam

I have no idea where you are anymore. You have gone from arguing that tigers shouldn't be kept as pets to animals shouldn't be taken out of the wild to ferrets don't go underground when rabbiting?

The original issue was the selling of CAPTIVE BRED tigers that you had a problem with. Despite numerous explainations of why the notion of 'zoos= suitable and private keepers = not suitable' is farsical, you are convinced that you are untouchable in your opinions.

I will ask, politely one more time.

Please answer my question....where exactly do you draw the line?


----------



## murph3010

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Its not though.
> 
> Maybe you do something wrong then if yoou loose your ferrets.
> I shoot and hunt. And if your saying that you shouldnt let a ferret go underground cause your scared it wont come back, then your the one typing CRAP.


if you noticed i said i go ferreting and have done for years i have no issue with putting my ferrets down ! but to to say that a ferret cant be lost is rubbish! i have never lost one for longer than overnight and anyone who knows their stuff wont panic. You claimed that ferrets catch rabbits! they are used to bolt rabbits my pedigree chum not catch them as you stated. The rabbits are caught by nets, dogs, BOP or shot. How many purse nets do you keep Sam? do you work ferrets with dogs or bop ? Lets hear what you have to say on the subject ! 

to be continued............


----------



## LoveForLizards

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Yep you must just have bad luck.
> 
> Do you put your ferrets underground? when rabbiting. Yes then whats the problem. It aint my fault you cant keep hold of them.


Omgosh.
Why would I want to keep hold of them? What would be the point in that? That wouldn't be ferreting now would it.
Excuse me whilst I go smack my head off of a brick wall. I have a feeling it will be much more productive then continuing this conversation with you.


Toodles cupcake :flrt:


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Are you going to use that every time. They originated from the wild. Its ridiculous.
> 
> I have lots of animals actually, chickens ducks dogs cats snakes. and probably more when i can afford it.
> 
> Im arguing because your saying people are still taking wild tigers. When i just said there already are captive ones.


am i goin to use it every time?? well yeah until it actually registers with you...... and apart rom the fact that its true! and no matter how much you argue the toss it isnt goin to change......

you werent sayin that originally though were you.......stop changin your arguement half way through, you dont think tigers should be kept by private keepers cos theyre wild animals.....same applies for every god damn animal kept by private keepers now, they were all wild animals once, and a lot of them were considered dangerous and still are now even your good old doestic dog


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

LoveForLizards said:


> Omgosh.
> Why would I want to keep hold of them? What would be the point in that? That wouldn't be ferreting now would it.
> Excuse me whilst I go smack my head off of a brick wall. I have a feeling it will be much more productive then continuing this conversation with you.
> 
> 
> Toodles cupcake :flrt:


 Your the one complaining your ferret will get lost if you release it.


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> Your the one complaining your ferret will get lost if you release it.


 
no she wasnt, she was tryin to point out that not all ferrets come back straight away and that they dont have a homing sense..........


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

murph3010 said:


> if you noticed i said i go ferreting and have done for years i have no issue with putting my ferrets down ! but to to say that a ferret cant be lost is rubbish! i have never lost one for longer than overnight and anyone who knows their stuff wont panic. You claimed that ferrets catch rabbits! they are used to bolt rabbits my pedigree chum not catch them as you stated. The rabbits are caught by nets, dogs, BOP or shot. How many purse nets do you keep Sam? do you work ferrets with dogs or bop ? Lets hear what you have to say on the subject !
> 
> to be continued............


 I just went with my dad and uncle and he put the ferret down some holes, then it started rumbling and a rabbit charged out.

He did use a purse net, and the ferret just came back out when he realised there was nothing down there. 

No problem. No lost ferret. And every other time we go ferreting, No problem.


----------



## gazz

There hasn't been any Tigers taken out the wild in years has there ?.When was the last one taken from the wild.Tigers have been bred in captivity meny generations now there are a fair amout of mumtations as a result.As there are more captive Tigers said to be in taxas than whats left in the wild so there enough captive stock.Though i don't think there much us to to Tigers as i bet a lot of them are Tiger species intergrads,Or even hybrids with a % of Lions blood.

I have no problem with keeping Tigers as long as you know what you doing or rather what your getting your self into.Same as a horse realy ofcourse a horse wouldn't eat you.But there a big animal and if you don't know what your doing they can sure give you a kicking and very esay kill you.And cattle mainly a bull can be even more dangerous on the rampage to owner and puplic and they've been demesticated X amount of years.

The only real problem i have is when a place of conservation breeds from mutations animals like White Tigers,ginger Tiger'etc or white Lions.This is not what conservation is about and these mutation should be castrated/spayed and cull from breeding projects as there DNA is no use for release to the wild.They should not be breeding the white lion like there doing there a mutation not a Lion species/Sub species.


----------



## NBLADE

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> As apposed to a random person keeping them in cages in their garden, near kids neighbiurs and traffic.
> 
> The answer should be clear.


 
it wont be a random person in a little cage in their garden, they would not get issued the licence and therfore wouldnt be able to buy one, the environment would have to be suitable, ie cage size big enough, escape proof, safe etc etc 





C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> And you cant get the point that that isnt an exuse.
> 
> Snakes dont need to come form the wild anymore because they are already in captivity.


 

your showing a lack of knowledge on the subject here, yet you continue to argue an invalid point, there are hundreds of different species of snakes, some are thriving in captivity, some are very rare in captivity and becoming extinct in the wild, people need to take a few of the species from the wild to breed and get captive populations up, in order to save the species. 


and your arguing you shouldnt take a wild tiger and put it in captivity, who said people were doing that, people buy CB tigers, no one is taking them from the wild anymore, they were taken from the wild many yrs ago to get breeding and numbers back up, as they were on the brink of extinction due to hunting and lack of territory, now the numbers are on the increase, sadly it wasnt done sooner and some subspecies of tigers did become extinct, i would rather the species live on in captivity then become extinct completely. 

oh and if animals shouldnt be taken from the wild, what about all your pets all their ancestors were once wild, just because its a few yrs down the line does that make it acceptable in your eyes


----------



## NBLADE

gazz said:


> There hasn't been any Tigers taken out the wild in years has there ?.When was the last one taken from the wild.Tigers have been bred in captivity meny generations now there are a fair amout of mumtations as a result.As there are more captive Tigers said to be in taxas than whats left in the wild so there enough captive stock.Though i don't think there much us to to Tigers as i bet a lot of them are Tiger species intergrads,Or even hybrids with a % of Lions blood.
> 
> I have no problem with keeping Tigers as long as you know what you doing or rather what your getting your self into.Same as a horse realy ofcourse a horse wouldn't eat you.But there a big animal and if you don't know what your doing they can sure give you a kicking and very esay kill you.And cattle mainly a bull can be even more dangerous on the rampage to owner and puplic and they've been demesticated X amount of years.
> 
> The only real problem i have is when a place of conservation breeds from mutations animals like White Tigers,ginger Tiger'etc or white Lions.This is not what conservation is about and these mutation should be castrated/spayed and cull from breeding projects as there DNA is no use for release to the wild.They should not be breeding the white lion like there doing there a mutation not a Lion species/Sub species.


 
i disagree with the white lion bit, why shouldn't they breed them, the origional white lions were from the wild, there used to be alot more wild white lions but hunters would kill them for their skin, now there are only a few white lions left in the wild, and its just a basic recessive gene, the gene came from the wild, why shouldnt they breed it release it back, before it is lost for ever due to mans hunger for destroying things,


----------



## ryanr1987

Tigers are awsome and can be kept successfully in captivity with little problems if the keeper is aware of the tigers behavior and knows what there doing. tigers are very territorial and a cub that has not been hand reared will show this in captivity in fact even hand reared tigers have been known to show this behavior . Big siberians & bengels can get around 350-400lbs and that is one big animal.


----------



## gazz

NBLADE said:


> i disagree with the white lion bit, why shouldn't they breed them, the origional white lions were from the wild,


They use to apper in a prides every so often.The white gene is a recessive trait a mutation not a differant Lion species,Sub species.Just coz there found in the wild dosen't mean you should go on making Whole prides of them.If mother nature choose's for Lions to go white and they all live and do well then fair enough.But we shouldn't be doing it.Multiply the white gene mutation at the rate we are.A fair amount of wild fawn Lions are HET White so there not going to die out as long as Lion exsist.You just need the right Lions to meet so it's a fact of when.

I see pied black bird quite often.But i wouldn't breed them to release them just coz i've seen the odd one or two in the wild.It's a genetic cock up but if mother nature choose's to let the color sceam rain than fair do's but in her own pace.


----------



## murph3010

C4VEMAN-5AM said:


> I just went with my dad and uncle and he put the ferret down some holes, then it started rumbling and a rabbit charged out.
> 
> He did use a purse net, and the ferret just came back out when he realised there was nothing down there.
> 
> No problem. No lost ferret. And every other time we go ferreting, No problem.


 
Sorry just realised your only a kid! look if your going to make out you know things about a subject you better be sure to have had some experience in it next time lad. Enjoy ferreting its great fun im sure you will learn alot if you go out enough with your uncle and dad.


----------



## C4VEMAN-5AM

murph3010 said:


> Sorry just realised your only a kid! look if your going to make out you know things about a subject you better be sure to have had some experience in it next time lad. Enjoy ferreting its great fun im sure you will learn alot if you go out enough with your uncle and dad.


 Yeah I do, but i prefer rabbiting with head lamps, and pigeon shooting, love pigeon shooting.


----------



## clob91

Tigers hhmm, defo a sam.

but along with the subject, i think that in a the right hands, with money and time and of course space, there is no problem in keeping a tiger or any other big cat in private.

i've seen a lot worse in the zoo i visited not too long ago.

a lion in an enclosure about 15-20 square metres in total... that however i think was horrible, also there was no animal enrichment. 
So i think that yes, in the right hands it's ok as long as people only get an animal of this sort, knowing what requirements they need. :gasp:


----------



## cmullins

yep i think this thread has been sumed up


----------



## boidae

HABU said:


> are you Boidae?? or his brother?


are you a colubridae?? or its mother?

stop referring me to people.


----------



## ex0tics

Astral said:


> WTF
> 
> Oh dear, I don't agree with this... Tigers should not be kept as pets...
> 
> for just a grand as well thats pretty much affordable to any old tom dick and harry.


Aren't Tigers in zoos practically pets? I haven't yet saw you outside ranting.

The fact is people do it and the chance of if stopping is low no I don't agree with it but if people can keep corn snakes then why not CB tigers?


----------



## boidae

ex0tics said:


> Aren't Tigers in zoos practically pets? I haven't yet saw you outside ranting.
> 
> The fact is people do it and the chance of if stopping is low no I don't agree with it but if people can keep corn snakes then why not CB tigers?


theres a vid on youtube of tigers in a zoo eating one of the staff.


----------



## richardward

There used to be loads of Tigers in the province I am living in in China. The Species Guangdong Tiger, then Mao Zhe Dong came to power and ordered everybody to kill them as they were seen as pests, now there are only a handful left.....and just the other day I saw someone selling Tiger foot. I took a picture. I doubt its real as the chinese government are kicking up a fuss about this kind of thing now, but its still pretty minging:


----------



## colinbradbury

caveman , you are still yet to answer two questions asked very early on in the arguments and also a couple of times after that.

what animals do you keep ?

and what animals do you consider being ok for people to own . do for example you think it is wrong for private keepers to own a serval or an asian leopard cat - both wild cats , what about early generation bengal and savannah cats both hybrid wild cats crossed to domestic . what about a cheetah , what about a jaguar and what about a lion which are all wild also. and what about a liger which it not sean in the wild at all (all of which would need dwal) 

i would just like to know a what point you would draw the line


----------



## boidae

you know when humans went to other countrys and captured tigers and charged people to come and see them, i reckon the governments still got that on their minds, make them extinct in the wild so you have to pay to see them!!

either that or paying to see them is an outcome from making space for their domesticated pets aka humans.

win win for the governments.


----------



## bgfaith

I have just spent a very long time reading this whole thread and i personally think that Sam keeps changing his mind on what his arguing that he has forgotten what his original argument was to begin with. Sam why dont you answer what animals are acceptable to keep? For 2 people who also ferret rabbits to say the same thing and being different to what your saying couldnt they possibly be right if it is a possibility that the ferret my get lost occasionally?

If it is so "easy" for people to get a tiger as a "pet" why dont you try and see how long it is till your laughed in your face. Zoos are no better at keeping animals than what a private keeper would the amount of times people have put comments up on here about how bad conditions they have even seen snakes in shows you that zoos arent as brilliant as you think they are.


----------



## LouRich

Think I may need to fit a bigger cat flap first : victory:


----------



## cmullins

LouRich said:


> Think I may need to fit a bigger cat flap first : victory:


:lol2: love it


----------

