# Aren't they better in a wild state?



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

I have kept a few different inverts, including T's, in my time.

I am obviously not passionately _against _keeping inverts.

And I can see from the threads and posts on here that people do try v hard to replicate a natural environement, the best that they can. However, my feeling is that even the best effort to recreate an acceptable living environment is never as good as it living in a _true_ natural environment. Even if the invert may sometimes live longer captive, that in itself does not = better than it's natural environs.

And yes, I realise that inverts cannot think per se, and that one that has been captive bred will not know any different, again, that doesn't mean it is good or even right, any more than it would applying that logic to any other species.

I repeat, I have kept inverts myself, but never really gave it a lot of thought, _at the time_.

And all too often the environment created isn't even a good effort, for the species in question.

I have personally read of people keeping T's and other inverts in a terrain that it would not live in, in nature(too dry, _not_ dry enough, etc).

While it may stay alive, it is likely that in some way the creature is suffering, much like how we could survive extreme conditons, but you would not wish to _live in_ them.

Moreover, there are many species of invert whose life span is v probably reduced by being kept captive, I can think of a few species that do not do well captive, and yet there is still a market for them.

Some may take the view that they are only bugs, and as long as there are plenty of a species, then it is okay, and that is fair enough, but do you extend that to any living thing which you consider to be 'only', and that there are lots of? Dangerous ground if you do.

Not setting out to be controversial here, before anyone chooses to take offence, or anything, just something I have thought about myself, if I am being honest.

I've read other exotic forums, and another slight concern to me is the number of people who often have a substantial number of v different inverts, some of which they almost buy like they were buying a book. _Unless someone is prepared to invest a lot of time, effort and money, then in many cases, neglect can follow, simply due to the volume and variety that they have_.

Not hankering for an outright ban, or even a partial one, I believe the best sort of change comes from within, and that means people maybe taking into account that these are wild creatures that can never be domesticated, and that on a lot of occasions, what they are buying _is _wild caught.

I appreciate that some people choose not to buy WC, but clearly many do, since most dealers offer WC species, routinely.

To be honest, even if a stranger claims something was captive bred, do you just take that at face value? Most probably would, unless they claimed it was a captive bred invert, that had rarely been captive bred, then you_ may_ question it. But in most cases, if the seller said it was CB, then most people would believe that, esp if they wanted that given species.

Forums like this help somewhat, in terms of advice etc, however, my guess would be that most of those that buy exotic inverts probably _don't_ read forums for advice, and may not even read up much about it, on the net. They may rely entirely on the advice of the guy in the store where they bought it, which may or may not be good.

Just my thoughts..


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

I think there are pluses and minuses to being in the wild and being captive.

In captivity (if looked after properly) inverts are guaranteed food (and won't run the risk of suffering from starvation), the right environment, no risk from predators and generally a better standard of living - for example many keepers actively try and get rid of mites.

The downside for the invert is a lack of freedom, although you could argue this doesn't apply to certain species such as tarantulas who don't tend to stray very far in their lifetime anyway. To others like stick insects, millipedes etc it may well be more of an issue.

Personally if an invert could think, then i think it would prefer captivity. I'm not sure many humans would be interested in going back to caveman times instead of living in luxury or at least easily but more confined. 

As for suffering, I don't think that's overly likely. Inverts don't have a well developed nervous system. It's doubtful they can feel pain, let alone endure terrible suffering. Also many have been successfully bred, eat well and live to at least an average life span, it they were that unhappy this probably wouldn't happen.

I agree with you that WC should be far more regulated and if possible abolished as I think the travelling and then the huge change in environment would be very stressful to any invert. Not to mention the problem with declining numbers in the wild.

Keepers who don't know what they're doing are a different matter and yes they should be educated but I think (hopefully) most people are responsible with their pets.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Leanne47 said:


> I think there are pluses and minuses to being in the wild and being captive.
> 
> In captivity (if looked after properly) inverts are guaranteed food (and won't run the risk of suffering from starvation), the right environment, no risk from predators and generally a better standard of living - for example many keepers actively try and get rid of mites.
> 
> ...


Very good post, and many good points.

I cannot fairly say if a thinking invert would vote to be captive or not, however, as a thinking_ person_, I certainly would not trade my free choice and will to wander, if I so want, *even with risks*, for some ultra secure yet artifical environment - even where my food and shelter needs were catered for, it would be, at best, a luxury prison.

It might be hard to regulate wild caught or not.

If someone put up an ad in the classifieds just now, offering CB inverts, the odds are that people_ would_ take them at face value, and believe them, even though the inverts could well be wild caught. They have no real way of being sure, it is not like buying a puppy, were you can ask to see the parents.

:lol2:


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Very good post, and many good points.
> 
> I cannot fairly say if a thinking invert would vote to be captive or not, however, as a thinking_ person_, I certainly would not trade my free choice and will to wander, if I so want, *even with risks*, for some ultra secure yet artifical environment - even where my food and shelter needs were catered for, it would be, at best, a luxury prison.
> 
> ...



To each their own I suppose, if I was offered the opportunity to live in a luxury prison or go back to a time when we lived in the wild (like inverts still are), where I would be riddled with lice/disease, struggling to survive the winter and then be dead at 40.....I would chose the prison. :2thumb:

Yeah it would be difficult, the easiest place to start (officially) might be bigger retailers. I think it's less likely for people on here to have WC. For example finding hundreds of spiderlings out in the wild somewhere and then bringing them all back here to sell privately just doesn't seem very likely. Also for common species when there's so many already in captivity, I just think the majority of people will have bred them themselves instead of going to so much trouble.

I think it would be a good idea for people on here to be more careful of buying rare species (especially adults) from relatively unknown sellers that have lots to sell if they are concerned about buying WC.


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

IMO I hate the idea of wild caught animals of any type. Breed them in the UK if they can't be bred then tough.


I'd never buy any wild caught animal, it's irresponsible IMHO.


Jim


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

JimmyMature said:


> IMO I hate the idea of wild caught animals of any type. Breed them in the UK if they can't be bred then tough.
> 
> 
> *I'd never buy any wild caught animal, it's irresponsible IMHO*.
> ...


Why irresponsible?


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

Lord Vetinari said:


> Why irresponsible?


Taking a wild animal from its natural habitat will impact it's local ecology in some way.

We think it's unacceptable to remove certain species but not others.

Why would people choose wild caught over captive bred?


It's irresponsible as it means someone chooses to impact the animals natural environment instead of getting one from a locally bred source.


Jim


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

JimmyMature said:


> Taking a wild animal from its natural habitat will impact it's local ecology in some way.
> 
> We think it's unacceptable to remove certain species but not others.
> 
> ...


But if sustainably done where is the problem? 

And "sustainable use" does not mean no use at all...


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

Lord Vetinari said:


> But if sustainably done where is the problem?
> 
> And "sustainable use" does not mean no use at all...


I ask myself why would people choose wild caught over captive bred? IMHO it's down to money, if it's down to money then that doesn't justify taking an animal out of its natural habitat.

If people can't afford a CB, save up and leave the natural population alone.

Who defines sustainability? The locals who are very poor who capture animals for the pet trade? No thanks.

Each to their own, I am happy with my morals, if other are too with different viewers that's also cool.


I'm sure the Japanese think the Whales in the Southern Ocean are sustainable, but does it make it right? Not IMO.


Jim


----------



## spinnin_tom (Apr 20, 2011)

you could argue that any non domesticated pet is better in the wild. captive animals when cared for correctly, have a stable temperature and humidity, as well as a regular source of food. be it a spider, snake, scorpion, turtle, lizard, frog or whatever. it still applies.

when i first got in to this, i went overboard. i had around spiders in one time at one point, because i could. some were bought on impulse and as a result, they were sold because i was in over my head and didn't want the spiders to suffer.

i now have around 25 ish inverts and all of them i know how to care for well. i wouldn't buy something without knowing care, even if i ask when i buy it, i still know about itbefore hand.

i think to stop things like what i did (ie buying on impulse) stricter laws need to be imposed and inverts need to be on the cruelty to animals act (that would be a huge challenge- inverts are used for lots of things)


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

spinnin_tom said:


> you could argue that any non domesticated pet is better in the wild. captive animals when cared for correctly, have a stable temperature and humidity, as well as a regular source of food. be it a spider, snake, scorpion, turtle, lizard, frog or whatever. it still applies.
> 
> when i first got in to this, i went overboard. i had around spiders in one time at one point, because i could. some were bought on impulse and as a result, they were sold because i was in over my head and didn't want the spiders to suffer.
> 
> ...


My concern isn't how people look after them, I'm very impressed with people care for their animals on this forum.

My concern is why wild caught when there's a captive bred alternative?


Jim


----------



## spinnin_tom (Apr 20, 2011)

JimmyMature said:


> IMO I hate the idea of wild caught animals of any type. Breed them in the UK if they can't be bred then tough.
> 
> 
> I'd never buy any wild caught animal, it's irresponsible IMHO.
> ...


how so ?
i have no obligation to buying wc or captive so long as the wild stock is not threatened.

sometimes buying wild caught is the only way, for example it increases breeding lines



JimmyMature said:


> My concern isn't how people look after them, I'm very impressed with people care for their animals on this forum.
> 
> My concern is why wild caught when there's a captive bred alternative?
> 
> ...


 
price


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

JimmyMature said:


> I ask myself why would people choose wild caught over captive bred? IMHO it's down to money, if it's down to money then that doesn't justify taking an animal out of its natural habitat.
> 
> If people can't afford a CB, save up and leave the natural population alone.
> 
> ...


Sustainable is a measurable and quantifiable thing, albeit with numerous contributing factors. If the current rate of 'take' is having no negative impact on the local ecology then it becomes very hard to argue against. Of course reaching that balance can be tricky and in some cases impossible - which is why some species are continually WC and some are left alone. IMO anyone who keeps a non-domesticated animal is only really sticking their head in the sand and passing the buck back a few generations (or years) for admittedly unsustainable aproaches to WC animals. 

The Japanese (as far as I am aware) have never argued that the whaling is 'sustainable'. They have used culture/scientific research excuses... but sustainable is one they havent used - because numbers are hard to argue against.


----------



## Carl6688 (Jan 18, 2011)

People seem to have a very romanticised view of nature, in reality it is quite a harsh enviroment for many animals. I don't know about you but if I had the choice of every day being a fight to survive or having a safe enviroment to live, with food offered to me when needed, I'd definitely take the latter.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

to be fair all CB come from WC stock and condemning the collecting industry and calling the people who own WC specimens 'irresponsible' is like a Vegan screaming 'meat is murder' whilst wearing leather shoes. :lol2:

but yes, i would prefer to see tighter controls over the collecting


----------



## spinnin_tom (Apr 20, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> to be fair all CB come from WC stock and condemning the collecting industry and calling the people who own WC specimens 'irresponsible' is like a Vegan screaming 'meat is murder' whilst wearing leather shoes. :lol2:
> 
> but yes, i would prefer to see tighter controls over the collecting


don't mention the v word.. either of them. yuk.

how did captive animals come about ? that's what you say to people who say don't buy wild caught..


----------



## rikki446 (Nov 24, 2011)

there are a few t's that have been placed on the CITES due to the expport of ts for the pet trade B Smithi being the main t that comes to mind and my prediction is the G rosea will be next these species as we know are very slow growing and will take and extreamly long time for thier population to bounce back i think alot of new people comming to the hobby buy a wild caught specimein without even relising they are w.c i think that is the main problem. as for care in captive bred t's i think that the majaroaty of owners if anything are obsesive about providing the correct enviroment for thier t. for me i love to imitate thier natural enviroment not just because it looks good but because i love to see any animal displaying natural behaviour in a natural habbitat but everyones diffrent and just like people throw away kittens and fish im sure it happens to t's unfortuntly i would gues my first t was a w.c. as it was a adult g rosea i bought from a local petshop but apon further research relised that somthing around three quarters of them that are sub to sub adult are wild caught and have vowed never to buy a wild caught specimien again as i hate the thought that my t could of been taken from its home in the wild that it has probably spent most of its life in stuffed in a box and sent a thousand miles acros the world in poor conditions


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

The argument saying that for it to CB it must first be WC is complelty true but that's not my point. My point is clear, why take for the wild to sell to the pet trade? I understand taking from the wild for improved blood lines but taking a few from the wild means many will be born in captivity to feed the demand.

I'm not looking for an argument and I don't expect you to change your views, I sleep well, you all may sleep well too.

With regards to the Japanese whalers, they are breaking the law for "Scientific purposes" and just so happen to sell all the meat....


Jim


----------



## Khaos (Jul 9, 2007)

JimmyMature said:


> Taking a wild animal from its natural habitat will impact it's local ecology in some way.
> 
> We think it's unacceptable to remove certain species but not others.
> 
> ...


Every captive bred animal is descended from a wild-caught specimin.

At some point, somebody had to take some from their habitat, attempt to recreate it, create a sustainable level of husbandry and successfully breed. 

If this is done in a sustainable way while maintaining a high level of compassion for the animal, I don't object to it. 

As for the original point, many inverts (and other exotics) have much longer lifespans in captivity, live longer, grow larger and generally have a higher quality of life in terms of health, diet and disease control.

Granted, it's not perfect, but it's also not the big bad you may think it is.


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

Khaos said:


> Every captive bred animal is descended from a wild-caught specimin.
> 
> At some point, somebody had to take some from their habitat, attempt to recreate it, create a sustainable level of husbandry and successfully breed.
> 
> ...


Can I suggest you read my posts, I haven't said its the big bad, I have my morals and it's as simple as that. Also I answered the point of every captive bred has to start somewhere in the reply above.


Jim


----------



## Khaos (Jul 9, 2007)

JimmyMature said:


> Can I suggest you read my posts, I haven't said its the big bad, I have my morals and it's as simple as that. Also I answered the point of every captive bred has to start somewhere in the reply above.
> 
> 
> Jim


I've read your posts, all of them, which is what led me to make my original statement.


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

Khaos said:


> I've read your posts, all of them, which is what led me to make my original statement.


In that case it's odd how you made a point on a subject that I've already conceded is true i.e. to be CB something must have come from the wild.


Anyway, as I said earlier everyone has their own morals, mine differ from yours. Doesn't make me wrong or you wrong, just differing views.

It's what makes the world go round...


Jim


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

no matter what you buy, CB or WC, there will be WC in its family tree, 1, 2, 3 or 40 times, no matter what generation.

ergo, even by buying CB you are sustaining the WC trade, its the nature of the hobby no matter how you try and sweep it under the carpet


----------



## Khaos (Jul 9, 2007)

JimmyMature said:


> In that case it's odd how you made a point on a subject that I've already conceded is true i.e. to be CB something must have come from the wild.
> 
> 
> Anyway, as I said earlier everyone has their own morals, mine differ from yours. Doesn't make me wrong or you wrong, just differing views.
> ...


Fair enough. As a continuation, if it's morally justified or acceptable to bring a new WC species into the captive fold, if done correctly and with the right intentions, is it acceptable to periodically do the same to help diversify the gene pool? 

Doing so occasionally would provide a greater range of genetic traits in the captive market, thus potentially healither and more diverse offspring. As a result, this would make captive bred more attractive and more sustainable, and ideally WC becomes less and less appealing to the average owner/collector. 

Deciding not to do so can lead to the same genetic lines mixing and breeding within the hobby and industry, propogating flaws and compounding minor issues and growing them. 

Lesser of two evils?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

JimmyMature said:


> Why would people choose wild caught over captive bred?
> Jim


That's easy to answer - their desire to have said thing takes over all else.


----------



## JimmyMature (Jan 8, 2012)

Khaos said:


> Fair enough. As a continuation, if it's morally justified or acceptable to bring a new WC species into the captive fold, if done correctly and with the right intentions, is it acceptable to periodically do the same to help diversify the gene pool?
> 
> Doing so occasionally would provide a greater range of genetic traits in the captive market, thus potentially healither and more diverse offspring. As a result, this would make captive bred more attractive and more sustainable, and ideally WC becomes less and less appealing to the average owner/collector.
> 
> ...


I completely agree that to help the gene pool is it justified, but to sell WC to Joe Blogs who has no intention of breeding or helping the gene pool then it's all about money and nothing else...


Jim


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Khaos said:


> As for the original point, many inverts (and other exotics) have much longer lifespans in captivity, live longer, grow larger and generally have a higher quality of life in terms of health, diet and disease control.
> 
> Granted, it's not perfect, but it's also not the big bad you may think it is.


If I filled my room up with treats and luxuries, and never left the house, I may live longer, as I would be at less risk from being knocked down, or a thousand other ways that you can die by being outside.

Would I_ want_ that?

No.

It would not be natural.


----------



## Dr3d (Jul 31, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> That's easy to answer - their desire to have said thing takes over all else.


 
Just out of curiousity where do you buy your CB Tarantula's I am looking to raise my collection and buy a couple more A/F.... ????


----------



## callum b (Sep 8, 2008)

Personally I don't like it when people try and look at an inverts life in captivity from a human point of view. 

Many of the inverts we keep are very inactive animals. In the case of scorpions, most spend pretty much the whole of their lives in hole, under a rock, behind a piece of bark etc. They stay there and wait for food to come to them. They may occasionally forage in close vicinty to their 'home' and males, when mature may wander in search of a mate but for most of the time they remain motionless in their hide. I'm sure I read somewhere that Smeringus mesaensis (the most studied scorpion species), that were monitored in the wild, spend 95% of their time either in or at the mouth of their burrow.

If an invert is kept in correct conditions, I don't think they would know any different, whether in the wild or not.

This doesn't combat the issue with the trade of WC inverts, of which I do have mixed feelings about, even though many of my scorpions are WC. However, I don't agree with people trying to have an inverts opinion of what life is like for them in captivity.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Dr3d said:


> Just out of curiousity *where do you buy your CB Tarantula's* I am looking to raise my collection and buy a couple more A/F.... ????


I don't.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

callum b said:


> If an invert is kept in correct conditions, I don't think they would know any different, whether in the wild or not.
> .


Which is often a large 'if'.

Besides, you could captive breed any living thing, and apply that logic - that it would not know 'any different'.

Where do you draw the line?


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

callum b said:


> Personally I don't like it when people try and look at an inverts life in captivity from a human point of view.


I can see what your trying to say but if we all went along with that then there would be no debates on animal welfare at all. 

So why stop animal cruelty? A cat or dog can't understand the concept of evil or truly understand what's happening to it but (some) humans can empathise with pain and suffering so wish to prevent another living thing experiencing it. Why try and reintroduce endangered animals back into the wild from captivity (assuming they're not of high ecological importance) when the animals themselves, as you say, don't know the difference? A human motive maybe?

No one can truly comprehend anything other than a human point of view. I appreciate that we can never really assume to know what an invert is experiencing but that's not really a reason in itself to never debate it.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

> Just out of curiousity where do you buy your CB Tarantula's I am looking to raise my collection and buy a couple more A/F.... ????





Mr Mister said:


> I don't.


Strange, that in both your wanted adds you don't mention either WC or CB:
In your add I notice you make no mention of CB or WC:
http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/invert-classifieds/765472-any-surplus-unwanted-these-sale.html

http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/spiders-inverts/765471-anyone-know-supplier-either-these.html

I think you pose a question that never really has a conclusion. However, I'd query how you conclude that WC is detrimental. Zoo's are full of WC animals, providing an opportunity to understand the creatures that inhabit this world and how they can have a beneficial affect on us. Studies are ongoing into the venom, pheromone and biological make up of so many animals in a bid to cure disease. They also provide an opportunity to study how we might improve the wild habitat that they would naturally inhabit.
Often the numbers that are taken for the exotics hobby do not have a huge impact on the wild population, and because of the numbers bred from inverts its often the case that this small catch feeds a much wider audience and demand.
The issue on CITES that was raised earlier was not put into action because tarantula numbers were declining, it was put in position to protect the whole of that countries fauna. In contrast threatened species such as Poecilotheria are not protected by CITES or the Lacey Act but local and national law protects to an extent.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Fact is, its rarely the collectors that cause such an impact on the invertebrate population. Its more often habitat destruction that has the biggest impact.

I support CB, but that doesnt mean I wont buy WC


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Poxicator said:


> I support CB, but that doesnt mean I wont buy WC


exactly the same here :2thumb:


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Strange,.


Nothing strange.

I said in the OP I had bought inverts before.

I said that I was_ not_ passionately against doing it.

That said, sometimes it is possible to have a nagging doubt that maybe, just maybe, these animals are wild, can never be domesticated, and should really be left in their natural environs. It's possible to even have a collection, and begin to think that, isn't it?

And, in a wider context, it is part of a discussion, about inverts, on an invert discussion forum, and, to that end, someone made a v good point that even CB stock has come from WC stock, at one time or another.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Zoo's are full of WC animals,


Zoos are pretty horrible places.

Bad example.

Polar Bear here paces, and you need only eyes to see that having it there, ain't great for the Bear.

Panda's? Would sooner the money was spent conserving their natural habitat.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Ah but we're not talking Polar Bears and Pandas, as you so rightly said were having a discussion on inverts in an invert forum.


----------



## Dr3d (Jul 31, 2010)

Have to say I'm with Steve an Pete.... I support CB to the max but would buy WC adults for refreshing bloodlines..


----------



## swampeh (Dec 4, 2011)

Personally i would rather buy cb where ever possible but i do realise that cb have a wc lineage.
For example i would like a breeding pair of avic.avics but i know that i would probably have to buy a wc pair so i can make this happen, but then i could put back into the cb market.

Hey and dont disrispect the Veggies :lol2: i've been one for years and if you worked in a slaughter house i bet it would change your mind : victory:.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Ah but we're not talking Polar Bears and Pandas, as you so rightly said were having a discussion on inverts in an invert forum.


Scroll up...who_ first_ brought zoos into this?:whistling2:

Besides, the same arguement could be used on all animals.

I have seen documentaries on people in the US who routinely keep large cats, beautiful beasts. Sometimes_ they_ are captive bred. I guess they would know no better either. But it was sad to see them captive, they were somehow less of a tiger for it. 

Like I say, sometimes it is possible for someone to have an interest, and for that interest to maybe conflict with what else they think, which is what I am trying to express here.

It is like, I used to own birds.

They were well cared for, but I wouldn't again, because no matter how large the cage is, or if you even let them out for a fly, it just seems sad, exotic birds, confined.

My view


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Scroll up...who_ first_ brought zoos into this?:whistling2:
> 
> Besides, the same arguement could be used on all animals.
> 
> ...



To be fair he didnt bring the mamals up, you did.

And i dont think im the only one that thinks you have the wrong forum feeling that way about animal keeping.


----------



## kris74 (May 10, 2011)

Mr Mister said:


> Scroll up...who_ first_ brought zoos into this?:whistling2:
> 
> Besides, the same arguement could be used on all animals.
> 
> ...


I understand this but alas I'm too far gone to expand but sometimes there is a conflict going on in the mind.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

RandomDan said:


> And i dont think im the only one that thinks you have the wrong forum feeling that way about animal keeping.


Why?

Am I not entitled to form an opinion?

Am I not entitled to have mixed feelings, and express those?

Am I not entitled to suggest that it is way too easy to buy many inverts, and as a result, many are not well kept?

Are you suggesting that I should only post here if I agree with you, and am prepared to lie about any of the above?

Am I not entitled to also have an interest in inverts, and still hold these thoughts?


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

Dr3d said:


> Have to say I'm with Steve an Pete.... I support CB to the max but would buy WC adults for refreshing bloodlines..


Not to mention CB dont just appear out of no where.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

kris74 said:


> I understand this but alas I'm too far gone to expand but *sometimes there is a conflict going on in the mind*.


Precisely.

That is how I felt about the birds I kept, and decided that after they were gone, I would not get any more birds.

I can still appreciate birds, that said.

Um..both kinds!


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Why?
> 
> Am I not entitled to form an opinion?
> 
> ...


Im not saying that atall, people are entitled to have opinions.
But, this forum is for people of a certain interest, an interest it appears you dont share.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

RandomDan said:


> Im not saying that atall, people are entitled to have opinions.
> But, this forum is for people of a certain interest, *an interest it appears you dont share*.


I've just said I have a very active interest in inverts, and never miss a chance to watch or read anything about them.

So, why should I not post here, like you said?

We cannot agree with all things, all of the time, and I think it is good and honest to express diverse views, esp as much of what I wrote is actually just responsible.


----------



## hendrix 776 (Aug 6, 2010)

Carl6688 said:


> People seem to have a very romanticised view of nature, in reality it is quite a harsh enviroment for many animals. I don't know about you but if I had the choice of every day being a fight to survive or having a safe enviroment to live, with food offered to me when needed, I'd definitely take the latter.


Isn't that the same difference between fit, healthy, active people that interact with the World and those that appear on (or worse, waste time watching) Jeremy Kyle type shows?

Have you never seen a caged tiger?
a caged bird?

"a safe environment and food offered when needed" is offered to farm animals, zoo animals, prisoners and gimps!

Is that what you'd really choose? :whistling2:


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

anthropomorphising is irrelevant


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

hendrix 776 said:


> Isn't that the same difference between fit, healthy, active people that interact with the World and those that appear on (or worse, waste time watching) Jeremy Kyle type shows?
> 
> Have you never seen a caged tiger?
> a caged bird?
> ...


 
That was my feeling.

Keeping large cats and such exotics is big business, in the US, and even sadder is the fact that (surprise surprise), many people either cannot or do not know how to care for them properly, so either they are euthenised, or they end up in some tiger retreat, which is of often dubious standard.

Maybe people feel inverts are different, for whatever reason, and I suppose there are worse things in life, but even as someone who _has_ kept inverts, and who* is* fascinated by them, I would support a well run licence scheme, and even pay to have it, if I felt it would lend itself to less ad hoc buys, that then ended up sold on, discarded, neglected, and so on.

I know it would not be perfect, and feel sure that I am now going to get a burst of posts telling me how I am wrong, but maybe, just maybe, it would reduce the instances, for example, of someone irresponsibly keeping inverts in a rented place, getting into trouble with the landlord, then _deciding to go out and buy another invert._

If it could reduce that by even 20%, it would be worth it, imho.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

could do the same with fish too while theyre at it, after all fish are more capable of something akin to human rationalisation than any invertebrate.

oh and snakes, lizards, frogs, crickets

licence everything and make the passing of a professional qualification a condition of the terms of licence


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> could do the same with fish too while theyre at it, after all fish are more capable of something akin to human rationalisation than any invertebrate.
> 
> oh and snakes, lizards, frogs, crickets
> 
> licence everything and make the passing of a professional qualification a condition of the terms of licence


No i think you have it wrong.
We should be banning animals altogether because they are obviously not happy you see. :lol2:


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

RandomDan said:


> No i think you have it wrong.
> We should be banning animals altogether because they are obviously not happy you see. :lol2:


and then bulldoze all buildings, returning the land to its natural state so that every single creature can have its natural habitat back :2thumb:


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> and then bulldoze all buildings, returning the land to its natural state so that every single creature can have its natural habitat back :2thumb:


Ill draw up the plans and you bring the dozer! :war:


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> licence everything and make* the passing of a professional qualification* a condition of the terms of licence


I don't think that would be needed, albeit I suspect you are not being genuine.

Like I said, it would not be perfect, but if they were made more difficult to obtain, then it_ may_ cut down on many of the spur of the moment buys, and often from people who are not in a good place to be keeping such things.

I would suggest a pro qualifcation would only be needed if the person was keeping something known to be very dangerous, but that might already be covered by DWA in a lot of cases, anyway.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

RandomDan said:


> No i think you have it wrong.
> We should be banning animals altogether because they are obviously not happy you see. :lol2:


Glad it makes you laugh.

If you had worked with all the dog rescues that I have, because someone made a random purchase or decision, maybe you _wouldn't _find it that funny.

And reptiles and inverts are often abandoned and neglected, as well.

_Why_ do you think that is?

Do you think it is because...


A) They are sold to those that can demonstrate some level of care and responsibility?

or...

B) They are just sold to anyone that wants them.


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Glad it makes you laugh.
> 
> If you had worked with all the dog rescues that I have, because someone made a random purchase or decision, maybe you _wouldn't _find it that funny.
> 
> ...


No i think your right, but while your at it why not ban cars too as so many people drive without what they need and make it worse for the rest of us.
Or Tv as there are lots of people that find some Tv shows offensive
oo and the internet too as there are people out there that pirate things so it would be better for everyone if it just wasnt there atall.
You see what i mean it all makes perfect sense.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

oh please, those are not the only two reasons that animals are bought and sold.

there are many many reasons people buy and/or sell animals of any kind.

for instance, when i was working in Guyana there was a large area planned for clearing and the building of a housing sub division for low cost housing to give safe secure housing for those less fortunate.
before it was cleared there were many collectors in teams collecting inverts of all types to sell to the pet trade.

so, would you:
a) tell those people that needed a safe, clean place to live "tough, stay in the slums and compete with bacteria"?

b) allow the housing but know that the burning of the area would destroy millions of inverts?

c) allow the housing, harvest as much as possible to be sent around the world with A CHANCE of a well fed life and procreation?

like i say, its an instance, it doesnt always happen this way, but i have seen this with my own eyes


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

RandomDan said:


> No i think your right, but while your at it why not ban cars.


You need a licence to drive a car.

You_ have_ to demonstrate a level of being competent.

Next?

It is sad that you equate live, feeling, and sentient creatures with hunks of metal, like televisions and cars.

Perhaps that is part of the problem with animal ownership at large - people do what you just did, make_ that_ comparison.

Shame.


----------



## PeterUK (Jun 21, 2008)

There are some interesting thoughts running around this thread, some I agree with, some that i dont and others that seem to come straight from a PETA meeting.

Personally, If I'm after a particular species to breed I would choose WC over CB anytime UNLESS I know and trust the breeder and they can confirm the linage of the young (IE. WC parents). There is just too much hybrid junk being sold as pure species for my liking.


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

callum b said:


> Personally I don't like it when people try and look at an inverts life in captivity from a human point of view.
> 
> Many of the inverts we keep are very inactive animals. In the case of scorpions, most spend pretty much the whole of their lives in hole, under a rock, behind a piece of bark etc. They stay there and wait for food to come to them. They may occasionally forage in close vicinty to their 'home' and males, when mature may wander in search of a mate but for most of the time they remain motionless in their hide. I'm sure I read somewhere that Smeringus mesaensis (the most studied scorpion species), that were monitored in the wild, spend 95% of their time either in or at the mouth of their burrow.


Leave the lid off one of your enclosures.


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> could do the same with fish too while theyre at it, after all fish are more capable of something akin to human rationalisation than any invertebrate.
> 
> oh and snakes, lizards, frogs, crickets
> 
> licence everything and make the passing of a professional qualification a condition of the terms of licence


Yep and it would only be law abiding peeps who would abide by the licencing laws.
The wrong people wouldn't give a flipflop.


----------



## callum b (Sep 8, 2008)

Leanne47 said:


> I can see what your trying to say but if we all went along with that then there would be no debates on animal welfare at all.
> 
> So why stop animal cruelty? A cat or dog can't understand the concept of evil or truly understand what's happening to it but (some) humans can empathise with pain and suffering so wish to prevent another living thing experiencing it. Why try and reintroduce endangered animals back into the wild from captivity (assuming they're not of high ecological importance) when the animals themselves, as you say, don't know the difference? A human motive maybe?
> 
> No one can truly comprehend anything other than a human point of view. I appreciate that we can never really assume to know what an invert is experiencing but that's not really a reason in itself to never debate it.


My point wasn't for all animals. I am talking about scorpions mostly and what other information I know about other commonly kept inverts. For 'higher' animals I have different opinions.

How have you related providing an invert with the all the correct conditions for it to live, grow and breed in captivity with the feelings of a dog or a cat, animals with a far more developed brain and nervous system, that require far different care in captivity?

I am not trying to say that every animal lives a happy life in captivity, but inverts (when I say inverts, I am talking about the many species of T's, scorpions, roaches etc. that people keep on here) definately seem to be one of the most suited 'groups' of animals to keep in captivity. 

Why bother to introduce any endangered animal back into the wild? If it isn't required for our survival i.e. pollinating crops etc. then whats the point so long as we survive? Because IMO we should, because all species have as much right to exist as we do. Most (basically all) of the species currently endangered, are endangered because of the acts of humans. Yet humans are also the onle ones trying to save these endangered animals from extinction!! 

Taking a human point of view on how an animal lives just doesn't work though. Imagine if a lion took the point of view of a human in a crowded place, it'd be dreaming of massacres lol. I am solely looking at inverts and for them to be successful animals i.e. reach maturity and breed, they require food, water, the correct environment to live in and towards their latter days, a mate. That is all as far as science knows, and if we can provide those conditions then we are caring for them properly and not being cruel.

This discussion is including far to many different groups of animals. I'm sure it was originally supposed to only be about inverts.


----------



## callum b (Sep 8, 2008)

Stelios said:


> Leave the lid off one of your enclosures.


I am confused, mostly because it's very late and I'm knackered. Is this a joke or a disagreement with my point lol.

And no I won't....................... just in case :blush: haha.


----------



## Ash costa (Nov 26, 2011)

Different people will have different opinions on wild caught animals as for captive breed if the animal wasn't wanted in the pet trade they wouldn't be breed so surly an animal in captivity is better than no animal at all 


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=52.969652,-0.028156


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Stelios said:


> Leave the lid off one of your enclosures.


Ha ha - beat me to it!


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Stelios said:


> Yep and it would only be law abiding peeps who would abide by the licencing laws.
> The wrong people wouldn't give a flipflop.


They may not, but they would lay themselves open to prosecution.

Having the driving licence doesn't stop people driving without a licence, but it_ does_ penalise those that do, and it also puts many more of from doing so.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

I think you make a hell of a lot of assumptions without backing anything up with fact. You also seem to support your argument by using animals that are not part of the topic eg cats, bears etc. That merely clouds the discussion.

Zoo's keep far more than mammals, many concentrating on specific species whether that be butterfly farms or bug houses.

I find it a little naive to think that because an insect is kept in captivity that it's necessarily wrong. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that inverts are attracted to human dwellings and that in turn brings other animals. On holiday we often find moths attracted to the light, and geckos attracted to the moths. However Im sure if you take a search around your house you'll find spiders, flies, woodlice, springtails, silverfish, beetles etc. choosing to live in the home.
Its also true to say that although those insects found outside have the whole garden/estate/country to roam they often stay within a short range. Take your garden spiders for instance. They make a web and stay there. Knock the web down and they'll likely rebuild in the same place. And, interestingly enough they only use one side of the web!

To suggest an insect has the power to like, or feel happy is a little ill-informed. Whilst they have a brain its merely used to control a set of functions, and in many cases the insect can control its bodily functions without a brain. As Steve suggests anthropomorphising makes a rather vulnerable argument.

The insect world is probably the most adaptable areas of the animal kingdom. They can experience and thrive in areas that few other creatures can do. The outskirts of the Atacama, where Chile Rose are found, is a prime example. So little rain falls that the last rainfall is measured in years. The fluctuations in temperature found in other deserts where we might find beetles shows extreme highs and lows. The rainfall found in some of the amazonian forest is such that its almost permanently wet with humidity levels settled at 100% and yet its full of life.
In our own enclosures we don't tend to replicate such environments, and for the most part we don't need to. The insects themselves are adaptable enough to survive well in enclosures that are at odds to their natural habitat. And within these enclosures we can see the rewards of breeding programmes.
What we offer in the captive environment is a life for our inhabitants that favours their existence. The removal of parasites, prey, constant care and feeding. Above all is our desire to improve these conditions. Many of these species are the result of a breeding programme that, in the wild, would see a huge loss. Lets take Lasiodora species, the possibility of 1000 - 2000 eggs. A loss of 10% would be considered a fair degree of failure in captivity, however in the wild the environment couldn't withstand much more than 1% reaching adulthood. In my own experience out of the 4 that I kept I have 75% success rate to juvenile. Out of the 20 GBB (and similar number of pokies) I see a 90-95% success rate. Again, far more than the natural environment could sustain. Most of the inverts that make it into the world are merely part of the food chain.

I don't believe we need laws or licences to keep inverts. I believe what we need is good information, much of which is gained by previous keepers passing their information on. The many forums that are in existence help to facilitate that. Of course there will be instances where people lack good husbandry, but I'd suggest this is more likely to be the beginner than the seasoned hobbyist. And, from this loss its likely they'll learn better husbandry or cease to keep that particular invert. A prime example of this (considering its been mentioned earlier) is the camel spiders. Ever so often someone comes along and asks where they can find these. The usual reply is don't as it will die within a few months at best. We either haven't established how to keep these for long periods or we haven't learned that their life expectancy (in the wild or captivity) is short lived.

Ive read a number of your threads. I find them quite at odds with the majority of invert hobbyists and often showing a lack of understanding of the hobby. I also find that you're quite quick to get defensive, even though you've started what could be an emotive subject. To the credit of the members within the forum there's little "pouncing on the noob" and plenty of good healthy debate. There's nothing wrong with you posting your comments and I only find myself saying this because this has formed part of your own defence. Learn to listen as well as post, it makes for much healthier debate.

I think within your posts in this thread there are some valid points. We should question where our stock has come from. We should question how sustainable that is, and we should question whether our desire to have is too strong at times. Our methods for keeping our inverts should be established before we purchase, not after. IMO books or good resource should come before any new specimen, but the price, availability and speed of information provide a platform for adopting a different order.


----------



## RandomDan (Oct 11, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> You need a licence to drive a car.
> 
> You_ have_ to demonstrate a level of being competent.
> 
> ...


I wasnt comparing the animals with the hunks of metal just the systems you think would make any differance.
The one thing i will say though, lets say it did happen i mean no one would ever break the rules would they? :whistling2:


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> I think you make a hell of a lot of assumptions without backing anything up with fact. You also seem to support your argument by using animals that are not part of the topic eg cats, bears etc. That merely clouds the discussion.
> 
> *Which 'assumptions' do you think I have made 'one hell of a lot of'? Be precise. And what precisely is it you would accept by way of 'back up', for whatever assumptions it is you think I have made? *
> 
> ...


*Ask yourself this.*

*Leave aside the pet stores, because they have always had a bad rep.*

*Think of six 'reputable' online traders.*

*You don't need to name names.*

*Now, ANYONE can buy ANYTHING on their stock list, and how many of those six will ask for any criterea that shows that the buyer is going to show some level of knowledge?*

*I would guess almost none.*

*I think they would be happy to sell to anyone that had the money.*

*Better regulations would help with that.*


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

RandomDan said:


> Ino one would ever break the rules would they? :whistling2:


People always violate regulations.

Doesn't make them not worth having.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

I would answer but you've already shown a number of additional assumptions to support my point. 

Time for me to get gigging


----------



## Kamike (Aug 3, 2009)

I can't work out the point of this thread anymore it's gone in to many different directions. I'll be back to make my points after a couple of beers.. everything makes more sense once I've had a beer.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Kamike said:


> I can't work out the point of this thread anymore it's gone in to many different directions. I'll be back to make my *points after a couple of beers.. everything makes more sense once I've had a beer.*


Have six.

Then see what happens.
:whistling2:


----------



## Kamike (Aug 3, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Have six.
> 
> Then see what happens.
> :whistling2:



Challenge accepted

IF I remember to come back to the thread prepare to be amazed


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Kamike said:


> Challenge accepted
> 
> IF I remember to come back to the thread prepare to be amazed


We shall await your return and offerings..

: victory:


----------



## callum b (Sep 8, 2008)

I really don't understand where you are trying to go with this thread mister.

I understand some of your points about people who have no clue how to look after animals being able to buy them, no questions asked. This is wrong and I think some suppliers and shops need to be more responsible.

However, you are on an invert forum, and from what I can make out in some of your posts you are attacking people who keep inverts. How is this relevant and useful to have on this particular forum? You are also trying to make out that some extremely knowledgable people who have contibuted to the thread don't know what they are talking about. From previous threads you have made, nearly all your invertebrate knowledge has come from linked Wikipedia pages, the rest of your 'facts' and points have just been assumptions backed up by nothing.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

callum b said:


> I really don't understand where you are trying to go with this thread mister.
> 
> I understand some of your points about people who have no clue how to look after animals being able to buy them, no questions asked. This is wrong and I think some suppliers and shops need to be more responsible.
> 
> However, you are on an invert forum, and from what I can make out in some of your posts you are attacking people who keep inverts. How is this relevant and useful to have on this particular forum? You are also trying to make out that some extremely knowledgable people who have contibuted to the thread don't know what they are talking about. From previous threads you have made, nearly all your invertebrate knowledge has come from linked Wikipedia pages, the rest of your 'facts' and points have just been assumptions backed up by nothing.


Nope - again, I have not attacked anyone on here.

I_ have_ expressed and shared some thoughts, none of which attacked the efforts of anyone on here, albeit, in the last day alone there have been two instances that I find dubious, but let's_ not_ get into that.

My general point is that;

A) Too many people appear to purchase inverts without properly considering their care, or without even asking the house owner, or house mates etc. 

B) The reason they are able to do this, is because inverts are so readily available, relatively inexpensive, and those that sell are not obligated to ask the buyer any questions.

If anything, those that really love nature and bugs should welcome this sort of thinking.


----------



## Kamike (Aug 3, 2009)

Mr Mister said:


> Nope - again, I have not attacked anyone on here.
> 
> I_ have_ expressed and shared some thoughts, none of which attacked the efforts of anyone on here, albeit, in the last day alone there have been two instances that I find dubious, but let's_ not_ get into that.
> 
> ...


Looks to me that your general point is similar to mine.. people are idiots! Unfortunately there always have been and there always will be. Hopefully forums like this will turn some of the idiots into caring owners once they find out exactly what they have bought and take responsibility for their actions.

4 pints in and that's all I have at the moment, I would have more but I can't get "Broken Wings" out of my bloody head so progress is slow lol


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Kamike said:


> Looks to me that your general point is similar to mine.. people are idiots! Unfortunately there always have been and there always will be. Hopefully forums like this will turn some of the idiots into caring owners once they find out exactly what they have bought and take responsibility for their actions.
> 
> 4 pints in and that's all I have at the moment, I would have more but I can't get "Broken Wings" out of my bloody head so progress is slow lol


 


Thanks.
: victory:

At no time did I advocate an outright and overall ban.

But there_ has_ to be room to accomodate better regulations, and in the case of inverts ANY regulations, since the purchase of them is almost regulation free as things stand, unless it happens to be a DWA invert, in which case DWA rules would apply.


Nope, before everyone asks, I haven't sat here and drawn up a legal draught of what those regulations should be, but I remain confident that it would be perfectly feasible to put regulations in place that would lend itself to best practice, both from seller and buyer. 

I can understand why some traders may be against any regulations mind you.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Mr Mister said:


> But there_ has_ to be room to accomodate better regulations, and in the case of inverts ANY regulations, since the purchase of them is almost regulation free as things stand, unless it happens to be a DWA invert, in which case DWA rules would apply.


Here are just some of the regulations covering inverts (mostly within Europe):
CITES
The Lacey Act
Wildlife and Countryside Act
Habitats Directive (EEC)
The Bern Convention
United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity
UK Biodiversity Action Plan
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006
Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Mr Mister said:


> A) Too many people appear to purchase inverts without properly considering their care, or without even asking the house owner, or house mates etc.


Considering you haven't provided any back up to your argument, lets take A above. How have you measured this? How have you come to the conclusion that because someone asks a question about the care of a particular species it naturally follows that that person hasnt already found information and isnt subsequently seeking to confirm what they've read.


And, just purely for your information here are some insect zoos/parks:

Hatton Bug Zoo
Bedford Butterfly Park
Bristol Zoo - Bug World
Tropical Wings Zoo - Home Page
Buckfast Butterflies & Dartmoor Otter Sanctuary, Buckfastleigh, Devon (Butterfly & Insect Park)
(The) Butterfly Centre, Swingfield, Dover, Kent (Butterfly & Insect Park)
(The) Butterfly Centre, Eastbourne, East Sussex (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Butterfly Palace, Isle of Anglesey, Gwynned, Wales (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Edinburgh Butterfly and Insect World
Fairborne and Barmouth Steam Railway & Butterfly Safari, Fairborne, Wales
London Butterfly House (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Long Sutton Butterfly Park, Spalding, Lincolnshire (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Stratford Upon Avon Butterfly Farm & Jungle Safari, Warwickshire (Butterfly & Insect Park)
(The) New Forest Butterfly Farm, Ashurst, Southampton (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Tropical Butterflies (Barrow) Bury St Edmunds (Butterfly & Insect Park)
(The) Tropical Butterfly Gardens, Cleethorpes, Humberside (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Tropical Butterfly House, Wildlife & Falconry Centre, North Anston, Sheffield (Butterfly & Insect Park)
Worldwide Butterflies & Lullingstone Silk Farm, Sherborne, Dorset (Butterfly & Insect Park)


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

Poxicator said:


> Considering you haven't provided any back up to your argument, lets take A above. How have you measured this? How have you come to the conclusion that because someone asks a question about the care of a particular species it naturally follows that that person hasnt already found information and isnt subsequently seeking to confirm what they've read


I don't agree with his main point about regulations but come one he doesn't need to back this up with facts and figures.
All you have to do is look at a lot of threads on here to see that a lot of people are clueless on how to look after their pet, before and after they bought it.
Then there are the ones that get like a million T's in two weeks and six months down the line you see them selling them, because they haven't got the room, time or inclination to care for them any more.


----------



## Paul c 1 (Sep 30, 2009)

Stelios said:


> Then there are the ones that get like a million T's in two weeks and six months down the line you see them selling them, because they haven't got the room, time or inclination to care for them any more.


 
This is true - I do see a fair bit of this going on, or you get the typical phaser who keeps tarantulas for a year and then all of a sudden gives them up and moves onto keeping snakes etc .... I see it happening all the time.
-p


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

I accept what you both say above, but that doesnt necessarily mean its to the detriment of the invert. And, whilst its a basis for coming to such conclusions its rather biased to think that the majority of invert keepers are like this or that we should all be punished with unenforceable regulations to stop the new kid on the block. That, IMO, would be a mask by the government for gaining more money, and to nobody's benefit (including the inverts) save their own pockets.
Its erroneous to suggest this kind of attitude makes up the bulk of invert keepers, and to me, that suggests that not only are these keepers at fault but all of us, who keep large numbers of inverts, are also at fault. That's you and me. And, we're deemed "idiots". But its not only us, its all the people who buy and don't even bother to read up on their care or visit forums. I don't think its much to ask how he came across that conclusion.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Here are just some of the regulations covering inverts (mostly within Europe):
> CITES
> The Lacey Act
> Wildlife and Countryside Act
> ...


It would take a massive amount of reading, to digest the content and aims of each of those organisations, not to mention what legal clout they have.

If any of those acts are designed with a view to reducing less impulse buys in the keepers trade, then they aren't working.

But I doubt that is what their central aim is, is it?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Considering you haven't provided any back up to your argument, lets take A above. How have you measured this?


With respect, you outright refused to answer my questions and points, raised in an earlier post, and chose instead to wave them aside, somewhat dismissively.

Do you think it is fair that you do that, and now ask questions of me?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Stelios said:


> I don't agree with his main point about regulations but come one he doesn't need to back this up with facts and figures.
> *All you have to do is look at a lot of threads on here to see that a lot of people are clueless on how to look after their pet, before and after they bought it.*
> *Then there are the ones that get like a million T's in two weeks and six months down the line you see them selling them*, because they haven't got the room, time or inclination to care for them any more.


Precisely.: victory:

All down to impulse buys, and a lack of criterea only lends itself to that.

Like I said before, traders could take the lead here, but if I were to think of six traders, right now, and ordered £200 from each, I am almost certain that none of them would ask me many questions.


----------



## joeyboy (Jul 19, 2008)

Stelios said:


> I don't agree with his main point about regulations but come one he doesn't need to back this up with facts and figures.
> All you have to do is look at a lot of threads on here to see that a lot of people are clueless on how to look after their pet, before and after they bought it.
> Then there are the ones that get like a million T's in two weeks and six months down the line you see them selling them, because they haven't got the room, time or inclination to care for them any more.


to be honest though that is pretty commonplace in all walks of life. Every animal sub-forum on this site contains pretty basic questions the owner should have researched before buying the animal, I mean hell look at the lizard forum, probably 50%+ of posts are people asking very simplistic questions about their leopard gecko or bearded dragon.

But then there's disciplining dogs, hell even little after their own children, a lot of people are just idiotic really.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> With respect, you outright refused to answer my questions and points, raised in an earlier post, and chose instead to wave them aside, somewhat dismissively.
> 
> Do you think it is fair that you do that, and now ask questions of me?


why are you so aggressive and defensive?

people have put forward perfectly acceptable explanations yet you wave them aside and say you are entitled to your opinion, which i dont dispute, but so is everyone else. your refusal to accept facts is also unfair.

if you cant accept that without inflammatory retorts then i suggest we lock this thread


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> IIts erroneous to suggest *this kind of attitude makes up the bulk of invert keepers*,.


Which not one single person has done, said or claimed.

The instances are too high for my liking though.

This can only ever be reduced by more exacting standards, hopefully they could come_ from_ traders, perhaps getting together, and deciding for themselves what these should be, but if not, then I see no reasons why some regulations could not be introduced that may reduce instances somewhat.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> why are you *so aggressive* and defensive?
> 
> people have put forward perfectly acceptable explanations yet you wave them aside and say you are entitled to your opinion, which i dont dispute, but so is everyone else. your *refusal to accept facts* is also unfair.
> 
> if you cant accept that without inflammatory retorts then i suggest we lock this thread


Aggressive?

Hardly.

I am sitting here in my Sunday pants, having a discussion.

I asked a fair enough question to another member.

What 'facts' am I refusing to accept?

Or do you mean I simply have my own point of view, and it doesn't sit well with you, or a few others?

Lock the thread if you wish.

I would sooner you let the conversation flow, but hey, not my forum, and I am not a mod on it, so go ahead if you prefer to.

Thanks: victory:


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

also i see no insistance on either of these two wanted ads of your own Mr Mister that the species in question MUST be CB

http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/invert-classifieds/765472-any-surplus-unwanted-these-sale.html
http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/invert-classifieds/806465-cicindela-sexguttata-beetles.html


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> also i see no insistance on either of these two wanted ads of your own Mr Mister that the species in question MUST be CB
> 
> http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/invert-classifieds/765472-any-surplus-unwanted-these-sale.html
> http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/invert-classifieds/806465-cicindela-sexguttata-beetles.html


Your friend already cited these, pages back.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> Your friend already cited these, pages back.


and i have brought it up again, just to remind you


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> and i have brought it up again, just to remind you


Of what?

I already read it, as I said, and discussed it.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> Aggressive?
> 
> Hardly.
> 
> ...


I understand that you are reluctant to see how the acts are working to reduce sales of wild caught animals Steve, but if you read through the acts and armed yourself with the relevant information i'm sure you would understand more clearly what is done


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> *I understand that you are reluctant to see how the acts are working to reduce sales of wild caught animals*


That's *not *what I said.

Several org's were typed out and posted.

I said it would take a great deal of time to read up and understand what function and legal clout each one had.

Did not say I was reluctant, just that it would take a long time, to do it properly.

No examples of their work was cited.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> That's *not *what I said.
> 
> Several org's were typed out and posted.
> 
> ...


Welcome to CITES

theres your first one, everything is on there that you need to know about how CITES effects the collection and trade of endangered species


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Welcome to CITES
> 
> theres your first one, everything is on there that you need to know about ow CITES effects the collection and trade of endangered species


Off to eat.

Will have a glance later, and see what impact it is having on impulse buys, and lobbying for more exacting standards.

Cheers


----------



## Baldpoodle (Apr 18, 2007)

Mr Mister said:


> Off to eat.
> 
> Will have a glance later, and see what impact it is having on impulse buys, and lobbying for more exacting standards.
> 
> Cheers


Let me save you some time. Along with all the other organizations, clubs and what not the impact will be sweet FA with maybe the exception of DWA where there is a criteria to be fullfilled before being allowed to own a DWA listed species, but even then knowledge about the species you intend to keep may not come up as I think it may just be a health and safty aspect. ie is it in a secure place where it can't get out. Maybe a DWA licence holder could say more on this?

The only people who will/can at this point do anything about selling to "impulse buyers" are the sellers. Small time sellers may sometimes give a dam enough to make sure the animal is going to a good home, but when it comes to the big dealers they really don't care, so long as the person is of legal age to buy it, and they can legally sell it, and then some don't care about this either, you just need to observe this at any show. And even if they did give a dam then they would only be able to sell face to face with the buyer so that they can inform an opinion on them, as with online sales you have hardly no way of knowing who is buying from you.
As with everything it is a money thing, dealers need to sell so they can buy more stock and make a living and small time sellers want to make a bit more money on the side and reduce the number of spiders they need/want to care for.

Also fact, is nobody really gives a dam about wc cb or how a species came into the hobby anyway, no matter what they claim. If they did then there would be a whole lot more of those so say "respected" tarantula keepers/breeders/dealers shunned in the hobby for illegal collecting, smugling and the like, but as the saying goes, "actions speak louder than words". 
Truth be told this is probably the best hobby for people with double morals and double sets standerds where everyone claims or thinks of themselfs as some sort of conservationest or god knows what else but in the end of the day its all a load crap, so if you enjoy your inverts just roll with it , if not then don't, as I very much doubt things will change even if they should....or shouldn't depending on how you see things. Its a sailing thing...the majority of sailers don't like anyone who rocks the boat. Hense many of the responces to you.:roll:

Have fun


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Baldpoodle said:


> Let me save you some time. Along with all the other organizations, clubs and what not the impact will be sweet FA with maybe the exception of DWA where there is a criteria to be fullfilled before being allowed to own a DWA listed species, but even then knowledge about the species you intend to keep may not come up as I think it may just be a health and safty aspect. ie is it in a secure place where it can't get out. Maybe a DWA licence holder could say more on this?
> 
> *The only people who will/can at this point do anything about selling to "impulse buyers" are the sellers. Small time sellers may sometimes give a dam enough to make sure the animal is going to a good home, but when it comes to the big dealers they really don't care, so long as the person is of legal age to buy it, and they can legally sell it, and then some don't care about this either, you just need to observe this at any show*. And even if they did give a dam then they would only be able to sell face to face with the buyer so that they can inform an opinion on them, as with online sales you have hardly no way of knowing who is buying from you.
> As with everything it is a money thing, dealers need to sell so they can buy more stock and make a living and small time sellers want to make a bit more money on the side and reduce the number of spiders they need/want to care for.
> ...


 
Very good post, well written, no punches pulled - thanks for it.: victory:

Esp agree with the parts in bold.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

you may agree with it but its still only hearsay :2thumb:


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> you may agree with it but its still only hearsay :2thumb:


More than that, imo.

BP was quite right with much of what he said, and he said it well (or she).

Do you consider this to be false? 

*'The only people who will/can at this point do anything about selling to "impulse buyers" are the sellers. Small time sellers may sometimes give a dam enough to make sure the animal is going to a good home, but when it comes to the big dealers they really don't care, so long as the person is of legal age to buy it, and they can legally sell it, and then some don't care about this either, you just need to observe this at any show' (BP)*


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> you may agree with it but its still only hearsay :2thumb:


More than that, imo.

BP was quite right with much of what he said, and he said it well (or she).

Do you consider this to be false? 

*'The only people who will/can at this point do anything about selling to "impulse buyers" are the sellers. Small time sellers may sometimes give a dam enough to make sure the animal is going to a good home, but when it comes to the big dealers they really don't care, so long as the person is of legal age to buy it, and they can legally sell it, and then some don't care about this either, you just need to observe this at any show' (BP)*


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

the fact that is your 'opinion' has never been contested.

what are YOU doing to remedy the situation though?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> the fact that is your 'opinion' has never been contested.
> 
> what are YOU doing to remedy the situation though?


As I have said, and as BP said, the lead needs to come for the traders.

I do not import, breed or sell_ any_ animals.

If I did, then I would be in the right position to do something.

How about you?

What are you doing?

Just asking the same question back.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> As I have said, and as BP said, the lead needs to come for the traders.
> 
> I do not import, breed or sell_ any_ animals.
> 
> If I did, then I would be in the right position to do something.


but you DO buy wild caught...at least you have in the past, that much is known, were you not successful in you attempts to culture the species bought?



Mr Mister said:


> How about you?
> 
> What are you doing?
> 
> Just asking the same question back.



i breed plenty of species to put CB back into the hobby as anyone can tell you. And no, i dont sell to anyone under the age of 18 without speaking to parents first and i dont sell to anyone i dont think will be able to cope down the line or if i doubt someones ability


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> but you DO buy wild caught...at least you have in the past, that much is known


 
Yes.

I admitted I have bought inverts in my very first post. (And since, several times, in fact, you mentioned it, just a few posts ago...)

I_ presently_ do not have any, and have not for a long time.

I retain an interest in them though, and never miss a chance to read or watch something interesting about them, _esp in their natural habitat_.

If ever I were to purchase them in the future, I would personally have no objections at all to my age or level of experience being asked.

If that had to be regulated, I would have no issue with that either.

It is the traders that must take the lead though.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> but you DO buy wild caught...at least you have in the past, that much is known, were you not successful in you attempts to culture the species bought?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That is good to hear.

How do you determine that they are under 18, or how they will cope, or what their ability is, esp if they order direct?

Do you ask them lots of questions?


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> I_ presently_ do not have any, and have not for a long time.


you got rid of everything in the last couple of weeks then? 
from the 18/01/2012:



Mr Mister said:


> I only keep inverts (plus other pets)


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> That is good to hear.
> 
> How do you determine that they are under 18, or how they will cope, or what their ability is, esp if they order direct?
> 
> Do you ask them lots of questions?


most of the people who buy from me nowadays are known to me and well over the age of consent, lol

i've been doing this for many years (years ago i too was a trader) and can suss people out pretty sharpish.


----------



## fenris wolf (May 26, 2011)

Why do people always think an animal is better off in the wild than captivity like the wild is some sort of garden of eden. Surely if all its needs are met it is irrelevent where it lives.After all animals can still suffer greatly in the wild


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Im sorry, but whilst they may be good points I don't see why a seller should put someone through the spanish inquisition before selling an invert. Many, especially at shows, provide caresheets, most provide information on request. At some shows its part of the terms and conditions that traders provide caresheets and on many of the tubs you'll find basic requirements. You'll also find a plethora of books at both shops and shows.
Sellers have a responsibility to the inverts and their investment and yet they're often the brunt of the internet know it all with less than a handful of years experience, no qualifications and the luxury of pseudo name.

To take an analogy, you wouldnt expect someone selling a car to scrutinise the potential buyer, asking about their previous history, inspecting the license for points. Nor would you expect the publican to ask your age when you're clearly over 18, or how many you've had when you order a pint. Its unrealistic, despite the fact the law places a duty of care.
I still think, however that your views are based on a limited number of forum posts, and you've still provided no creedance to your argument.


----------



## Baldpoodle (Apr 18, 2007)

Poxicator said:


> Im sorry, but whilst they may be good points I don't see why a seller should put someone through the spanish inquisition before selling an invert. Many, especially at shows, provide caresheets, most provide information on request. At some shows its part of the terms and conditions that traders provide caresheets and on many of the tubs you'll find basic requirements. You'll also find a plethora of books at both shops and shows.
> Sellers have a responsibility to the inverts and their investment and yet they're often the brunt of the internet know it all with less than a handful of years experience, no qualifications and the luxury of pseudo name.
> 
> To take an analogy, you wouldnt expect someone selling a car to scrutinise the potential buyer, asking about their previous history, inspecting the license for points. Nor would you expect the publican to ask your age when you're clearly over 18, or how many you've had when you order a pint. Its unrealistic, despite the fact the law places a duty of care.
> I still think, however that your views are based on a limited number of forum posts, and you've still provided no creedance to your argument.


Which shows is part of the terms and conditions that traders provide caresheets?

Sellers/dealers are often the brunt of what exactly? What are they being got at about? But if as you say "Sellers have a responsibility to the inverts and their investment" then should that not include making sure they are going to someone who at the very least knows the basics about careing for them?
You know how much experience and what qualifications all forum posters have?
So whats up with a pseudo name Mr Poxicator?


Your analogy is stupid to put it blunt. It would have been better to have a living, breathing animal based analogy rather than cold iron and steel non living based one.
Well thats ok after all its only a limited number of people (however many that is) buying living animals on impulse not knowing how to care for them!
And you have also provided no creedance to your argument againts him as far as I can see.


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

Well this has moved on a bit since I last commented... 

Op, I am well aware the Japanese explanation of 'Scientific research' holds no weight. I dont agree, and neither does pretty much anyone else. 

Like it or not, the buying and selling of animals is a business. The age of rich collectors visiting other countries and collecting specimens for private collections has long gone. (Probably not a bad thing either). Therefore money is the driving factor, whether its CB or WC... you cant demonise WC for 'being all about money' when any animal bought and sold is about money. 

The horrible truth is that destruction of habitat is far more devastating then collection for selling ever is. 

It is all very well and good moaning and asking for more legislation. But the thing about legislation is that it has to be able to be enforced and frankly cost effective. Put simply the existing legislation protects the most at risk species. You can demand testing for owners. But what does that acheive? I persoanly excell at regurging information, I can probably repeat word for word a brilliant caresheet, but it doesnt mean I actually know it. I could in 10 mins of research probably pass any test that you would set a potential owner. I would then forget it 5 mins later. It frankly helps no one and only put off potential buyers.... If people dont buy business' go bust. 

Ever heard of the law of unitended consequences? Its another reason legislation has to be carefully considered. Example (this is real, I cant recall the location though) : Somewhere in Africa has exceptionaly high malaria rates, an aid agency starts to give out mozzy nets to counter this. Malaria rates drop, people stop dying. Result. Except the locals are asking for the nets not only to sleep under, but also to fish. However the very fine mesh of the mozzy netsnot caught fish far too young. When this was happened the fish died, and the risk is now that the area both human and aminal will begin to die of starvation. 

Edit: Proof I dont make this crap up: http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=86565%20. http://www.dlist-asclme.org/group-discussion/general-discussion/the-use-mosquito-nets-fishing

Sometimes actions though well intentioned can have devastating consequences. 

Its all very well demanding that other people come up with ideas, and that it isnt your job to do so. Well I am affraid the minute you start clamouring for tighter restrictions it does. Or you become the worst kind of complainer - one who is happy to do moan but isnt prepared to do anything. 

In summary: You can't teach pork and you cant legislate for stupidity.


----------



## Baldpoodle (Apr 18, 2007)

Nicely put Lord Vetinari. Utopia this hobby is not.:2thumb:


----------



## kris74 (May 10, 2011)

Lord Vetinari said:


> Well this has moved on a bit since I last commented...
> 
> Op, I am well aware the Japanese explanation of 'Scientific research' holds no weight. I dont agree, and neither does pretty much anyone else.
> 
> ...


You love for being a sadist, I love you back for being completely righteous and true! 

I dealt with a gent at work the other day screamjng about all manner of crap that we can do nothing about, screaming about integrity and how he'll change the law and blah blah blah, ombudsman this and director of services that. Checked his complaint today and we bought his integrity and morals for 50 quid? If people are determined to change things then making noise just doesn't cut it, it has to be followed through with appropriate people and data collared which is an impossible task for Joe soap with a life to lead etc. I agree with some argument that are put by the op but also the other counter arguments from everyone else, pretty impossible. I personally feel that the buyer has the higher responsibilty to duty of care than any seller in this case and that really isn't something than can he police unfortunately.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Baldpoodle said:


> Which shows is part of the terms and conditions that traders provide caresheets?


Kempton, SEAS and Bugfest are 3 shows that I know include that in T&Cs.



> Sellers/dealers are often the brunt of what exactly? What are they being got at about? But if as you say "Sellers have a responsibility to the inverts and their investment" then should that not include making sure they are going to someone who at the very least knows the basics about careing for them?
> You know how much experience and what qualifications all forum posters have?


The brunt of complaints from people who deem themselves to have better information about husbandry than the shops. I often find they provide information when asked, or via other means eg. caresheets, their websites etc.
I wouldnt be so bold to consider any of them have any appropriate qualifications, save for a handful. But nor do I feel it necessary to have such just for keeping a pet.


> So whats up with a pseudo name Mr Poxicator?


I didn't say there was anything up with it. I said it was a "luxury" which provides a form of protection. However, you are quite aware of who I am as I pm'd you my name back in mid 2010.



> Your analogy is stupid to put it blunt. It would have been better to have a living, breathing animal based analogy rather than cold iron and steel non living based one.


I wouldnt call it stupid as the responsibility in both cases should be much higher than the responsibility of an invert. However, I accept that there are better analogies. 



> Well thats ok after all its only a limited number of people (however many that is) buying living animals on impulse not knowing how to care for them!
> And you have also provided no creedance to your argument againts him as far as I can see.


I believe the OP started this thread, surely therefore the onus is on him to back up his claims.


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

Poxicator said:


> "Well thats ok after all its only a limited number of people (however many that is) buying living animals on impulse not knowing how to care for them!
> And you have also provided no creedance to your argument againts him as far as I can see."
> 
> 
> I believe the OP started this thread, surely therefore the onus is on him to back up his claims.


I totally agree that the legislation on the invert keeping hobby is not warranted, would be hard to enforce and would only be adhered to by the scrupulous, but he doesn't need to back up this part of his argument with facts and figures?
How many threads have there been "my T's is dying it's on it's back", or "my Rosie hasn't eaten in like 6 minutes and 42 seconds", or "my T loves this bug gel" etc.
How many pictures have you seen with poor husbandry?
Also you see it, people new to the hobby they get one T, than another then they have like 346, 6 months later you are buying them on the classifieds.
That being said that goes for every pet people buy them and don't know or think about how to keep them now and in the future.
Is why so many cats and dogs get put down every year, hell some people can't even look after themselves let alone their children or pets!
This has already been said, it is plain as the nose on your face.
And don't forget how many peeps are there out there who bought maybe one t from a shop and are keeping it in wrong or bad conditions, never read and literature, done any research and basically couldn't give a toss or is just muddleing along?
We only see the ones who actually come on here to get spoon fed.


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

Stelios said:


> I totally agree that the legislation on the invert keeping hobby is not warranted, would be hard to enforce and would only be adhered to by the scrupulous, but he doesn't need to back up this part of his argument with facts and figures?
> How many threads have there been "my T's is dying it's on it's back", or "my Rosie hasn't eaten in like 6 minutes and 42 seconds", or "my T loves this bug gel" etc.
> How many pictures have you seen with poor husbandry?
> Also you see it, people new to the hobby they get one T, than another then they have like 346, 6 months later you are buying them on the classifieds.
> ...


Out of interest, why do you think this forum is representative of the general population? Obviously if people haven't read up on care, behaviour etc and have no idea what's going on then they're the ones more likely to post here. Why do you assume so many of the people who keep inverts but aren't on this forum are also not looking after them correctly? I know some people who have tarantulas and many more who have stick insects but never signed up to this forum, they care for their animals well. How do you know they haven't read any of the literature? Also from the pictures I've seen on here, the majority of the enclosures are fine.


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

Leanne47 said:


> Out of interest, why do you think this forum is representative of the general population? Obviously if people haven't read up on care, behaviour etc and have no idea what's going on then they're the ones more likely to post here. Why do you assume so many of the people who keep inverts but aren't on this forum are also not looking after them correctly? I know some people who have tarantulas and many more who have stick insects but never signed up to this forum, they care for their animals well. How do you know they haven't read any of the literature? Also from the pictures I've seen on here, the majority of the enclosures are fine.


That is the word "majority" the majority are fine, also I am talking about T's not stickies I no nothing about them but some people buy tarantulas because they think they are bad, I doubt you get many people saying come look at my stick insect it is bad ass?
Also I have never read a sensationalised story in the press about stickies either?
I have about owners not knowing about the ultricating hairs on T's and so on and so forth.
I never had to collect stickies when working for the RSPCA I have with T's.
Also some peeps buy a tarantula and will keep it how they were advised from the pet shop or what that bought it in thinking this is fine?
I know peeps who keep their T's wrong (I remember my friend who got me into T's saying about his G.rosea "when I take the lid off you you can feel the heat and humidity on your face), even the place where I work does!
People asking question on the forums is fine, people asking dumb questions that they should know before actually buying the animal well.
You are moving away from what I was saying anyway, I was saying there was no need for the hobby to be regulated but what the thread poster was saying about impulse buys, bad husbandry etc was born out in some of the threads in this forum and others, not a relfection on the general population as a whole.


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

kris74 said:


> You love for being a sadist, I love you back for being completely righteous and true!
> 
> I dealt with a gent at work the other day screamjng about all manner of crap that we can do nothing about, screaming about integrity and how he'll change the law and blah blah blah, ombudsman this and director of services that. Checked his complaint today and we bought his integrity and morals for 50 quid? If people are determined to change things then making noise just doesn't cut it, it has to be followed through with appropriate people and data collared which is an impossible task for Joe soap with a life to lead etc. I agree with some argument that are put by the op but also the other counter arguments from everyone else, pretty impossible. I personally feel that the buyer has the higher responsibilty to duty of care than any seller in this case and that really isn't something than can he police unfortunately.


You're too kind. 

I too would love to see an ideal situation where every animal went to a deserving home that had a perfect setup. Ideology is a wonderful thing, but it is always only very loosely based in reality. 

Don't get me wrong, I think wherever possible we should strive to reach that, but not at the risk of destroying our own hobby. 

There is a phrase used extensively in construction law and contracts. ( I have no doubt it exists elsewhere, but I will stick to what I know.) That phrase is "as far as reasonably practicable". It has a different meaning to "practical". Basically it means that you will provide information/protection or whatever has been specified by the clause to a reasonable level.... not to a level that would be prohibitive in cost/time/management or anything else. I.e. the gains don't outweigh the outlay or administration. 

As far as I can see the current legislation goes as far as "reasonably practicable". I would support any new legislation that sticks with that. However any legislation I have seen proposed by the likes of Mr Mister I feel go well beyond the bounds of reasonably practicable. I.e. the gains would be far out weighed by additional administration or outlay. 

The easiest way to to mke sure criminals are punished would be to fine or imprison everyone. But weirdly we dont do this...

Plus: anyone who sells their morals for £50 is likely to catch something... just saying...


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

Stelios said:


> That is the word "majority" the majority are fine, also I am talking about T's not stickies I no nothing about them but some people buy tarantulas because they think they are bad, I doubt you get many people saying come look at my stick insect it is bad ass?
> Also I have never read a sensationalised story in the press about stickies either?
> I have about owners not knowing about the ultricating hairs on T's and so on and so forth.
> I never had to collect stickies when working for the RSPCA I have with T's.
> ...



I see, I suppose I was seeing this thread in a wider context then. E.g all inverts instead of just tarantulas and the OP basing his opinion on wanting more legislation/less in captivity due to their overall care in captivity, not just because of what's seen on RFUK.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> most of the people who buy from me nowadays are known to me and well over the age of consent, lol
> 
> i've been doing this for many years (years ago i too was a trader) and can suss people out pretty sharpish.


Fair enough, Steve.

I don't think I have looked at your site, but anyway, it is important to stress here that at no point was I questioning your experience/ethics _personallly._

It cheeses me off though, how people take on animals (of* all* types), then a few weeks later, they are abandoning them, or trying to sell them on. 

Can you think of a recent example of when someone has tried to buy from you, and you have turned down their business? You don't need to give names and stuff, really curious if you have an example, and on what grounds you rejected them?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

fenris wolf said:


> Why do people always think an animal is better off in the wild than captivity like the wild is some sort of garden of eden. *Surely if all its needs are met it is irrelevent where it lives*.After all animals can still suffer greatly in the wild


 
Do you apply that to all animals?

Or specifically inverts?

I don't think anyone has ever stated that living in the wild is risk free.

However, that tends to go with the territory when you _are_ a wild animal, rather than one which has been domesticated.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> you got rid of everything in the last couple of weeks then?
> from the 18/01/2012:


I think misread the context.

I _presently_ have no inverts.

But this is about a much wider and more important issue, than _my_ not presently having any inverts.

True?


----------



## Lord Vetinari (Mar 4, 2011)

Mr Mister said:


> Do you apply that to all animals?
> 
> Or specifically inverts?
> 
> ...


No exotic I am aware of is considered to be a domestic animal. An animal kept in captivity is not automaticaly domesticated. 

A pedantic point, but still ....


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Im sorry, but whilst they may be good points I don't see why a seller should put someone through the spanish inquisition before selling an invert. .


Again - doesn't need to be a 'spanish inquistion'.

I for one would not be offended to be asked a few questions, by a seller, before I buy.

On the contrary, I would think_ more_ highly of the seller, if they did.

I will leave the car analogy aside, since I do not think that is a reasonable comparison. A car is just a hunk of metal. If I was in the business of selling cars, my obligation would probably end at ensuring that the person has all the legal documents needed to buy the car, and that would be that. I would take a different stance were I selling anything that lives.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Lord Vetinari said:


> No exotic I am aware of is considered to be a domestic animal. An animal kept in captivity is not automaticaly domesticated.
> 
> A pedantic point, but still ....


I agree.

By domesticated, _I _meant animals that they have, over a long period of time, become so used to living with man - that they would die if they did not. Like dogs or ferrets, for example.


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> I think misread the context.
> 
> I _presently_ have no inverts.
> 
> ...


well its part and parcel, you wouldnt want people to think you were hiding something, best to clear things up before they get out of hand dont you think?

and yes i have turned people down before now, just last month actually someone called me wanting to by some Poecilotheria regalis slings, but his knowledge of basic husbandry was limited so i turned him down and offered him something more in line.
yes i lost money, but who cares? its a hobby and its not all about money for me, its about knowledge.

but back to the original point of the thread for a second 'are they better off in the wild or in captivity'. I gave you a perfect example earlier in the thread of where they would be better off in caprivity.
now also you have to remember that only a tiny fraction of inverts lost from the wild end up in the pet trade, single figure percentiles if i remember correctly.

now let me put this to you, better off in captivity? or set in a block of resin for tourists?


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Stelios, you perhaps misunderstand me if you think Im asking for facts and figures. What Ive suggested is that the OP has made assumptions, and that those assumptions are based on the posts he sees within this forum. And that is based on his perception since joining less than 4 months ago. 
However, if there was to be made a case for legislation, you'd need a stronger case than "I've seen a few threads in a forum"


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Stelios said:


> I totally agree that the legislation on the invert keeping hobby is not warranted, would be hard to enforce and would only be adhered to by the scrupulous, but he doesn't need to back up this part of his argument with facts and figures?
> How many threads have there been "my T's is dying it's on it's back", or "my Rosie hasn't eaten in like 6 minutes and 42 seconds", or "my T loves this bug gel" etc.
> How many pictures have you seen with poor husbandry?
> Also you see it, people new to the hobby they get one T, than another then they have like 346, 6 months later you are buying them on the classifieds.
> ...


Well written post, and many good points.

You are also right about dogs.

So tragic to visit my dog shelter, and see meagre kennel after meagre kennel, with an anxious dog in it. Some are there for a long time, before they get a forever home. Some _never_ get one. 

Some don't even make it as far as kennels - dumped or killed.

I have had several dogs in my life, and have never bought one. I give a home to a nice rescue dog. 

I would also welcome a well thought out vetting process for dog ownership, and would happily pay to contribute to it.

I would also welcome harsher penalties for animal abandonment, neglect and cruelty.

The situation that I describe above, is likely replicated all the way though the country, and it really ain't good enough.

I would imagine that it would be harder to determine cases of neglected inverts, since they do not really have any status in law, and I have a feeling that if someone neglected an invert, to the point it died, it would never come to light, unlike when it happens with a dog, when it does tend to come to the public attention.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

Poxicator said:


> Stelios, you perhaps misunderstand me if you think Im asking for facts and figures. What Ive suggested is that the OP has made assumptions, and that *those assumptions are based on the posts he sees within this forum. And that is based on his perception since joining less than 4 months ago.*
> However, if there was to be made a case for legislation, you'd need a stronger case than "I've seen a few threads in a forum"


I thought I said the opposite.

That it was good that people here do post, ask questions, and fair play to them for trying.

At no time did I say that my thoughts were based on posts here, and certainly not exclusively.

It is also based on personal observation, and, it seems, this is a similar observation to many others on here, who have said similar.


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> now let me put this to you, better off in captivity? or set in a block of resin for tourists?


With respect - that is something of a loaded question, a false dichotomy, since it assumes that it is resin OR being captive.

It would be like my asking you - 'Ten years in prison or the death penalty, which would you like'?

Doesn't really work.


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

Leanne47 said:


> I see, I suppose I was seeing this thread in a wider context then. E.g all inverts instead of just tarantulas and the OP basing his opinion on wanting more legislation/less in captivity due to their overall care in captivity, not just because of what's seen on RFUK.



You quoted me on what I said about the posts on the forum not on what I was saying about any legislation on the hobby yes or no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leanne47 
Out of interest, why do you think this forum is representative of the general population? Obviously if people haven't read up on care, behaviour etc and have no idea what's going on then they're the ones more likely to post here. Why do you assume so many of the people who keep inverts but aren't on this forum are also not looking after them correctly? I know some people who have tarantulas and many more who have stick insects but never signed up to this forum, they care for their animals well. How do you know they haven't read any of the literature? Also from the pictures I've seen on here, the majority of the enclosures are fine.

I answered but now you try to make all sage like and say that you were seeing this thread in a wider context.
Pft.:iamwithstupid:


----------



## 8and6 (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Mister said:


> With respect - that is something of a loaded question, a false dichotomy, since it assumes that it is resin OR being captive.
> 
> It would be like my asking you - 'Ten years in prison or the death penalty, which would you like'?
> 
> Doesn't really work.


a couple of questions you have raised have been in the same vein, so touche 

but let me put it this way then, from the spiders that are removed from the wild would they be better off as:

a) the less than 10% that come into captivity and have a chance
or
b) the 90% or greater that end up dead as ornaments, snacks and/or homeopathic medicine?


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

Poxicator said:


> Stelios, you perhaps misunderstand me if you think Im asking for facts and figures. What Ive suggested is that the OP has made assumptions, and that those assumptions are based on the posts he sees within this forum. And that is based on his perception since joining less than 4 months ago.
> However, if there was to be made a case for legislation, you'd need a stronger case than "I've seen a few threads in a forum"


Yes I have, sorry.:blush:


----------



## Stelios (Aug 28, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> a couple of questions you have raised have been in the same vein, so touche
> 
> but let me put it this way then, from the spiders that are removed from the wild would they be better off as:
> 
> ...


Are they tasty snacks?


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> a couple of questions you have raised have been in the same vein, so touche


To be honest, Steve, I am sitting here half baked, after work, and no longer know if we are discussing captive cars or panda's.


----------



## Leanne47 (Mar 24, 2009)

Stelios said:


> You quoted me on what I said about the posts on the forum not on what I was saying about any legislation on the hobby yes or no?
> 
> I answered but now you try to make all sage like and say that you were seeing this thread in a wider context.
> Pft.:iamwithstupid:


Well obviously, when did I ask you anything about legislation? I didn't want to make things too complicated for you (that was a yes by the way) :roll:

Sorry but anyone could look sage-like when compared to someone who bases their entire debate on a topic from a few posts on a fairly small forum. :roll2:

Which I think you realise from your slightly defensive post :lol2:


----------



## Mr Mister (Oct 12, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> a) the less than 10% that come into captivity and have a chance
> or
> b) the 90% or greater that end up dead as ornaments, snacks and/or homeopathic medicine?


Is that for real, 90% are for things_ other_ than to be kept as pets/in captivity?

Ornaments I cannot justify. They wouldn't be for me. If a very attractive beetle died, and you_ then_ decided to make an ornament out of that, different story - but large scale killing with the sole aim of creating ornaments, nope, I cannot endorse that.

I may even suggest an outright ban on their manufacture and sale. 

I believe a number of cultures eat inverts as a large part of their diet. I would personally not eat them, but that is more of a cultural thing. If those that do _need_ to, maybe because they are a widely available, easy to get, and cheap source of protein, then I cannot deny them that. 

Homeopathic medicine, imo, is a crock of BS, therefore, I would neither endorse either it, or the use of insects in it's treatments(sic).

All of that said, two wrongs have never a right made, so several wrongs certainly do not make a right.


----------

