# Habitat Enrichment



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Just wondering if people feel this applies to Invertebrates, as it is a big issue with vertebrates in zoo enclosures etc. Enrichment is the provision of an enclosure that doesnt just fit the basic needs of the animal, but provides it with extra sensory stimulus (eg in primates toys, sound games, climbing frames etc etc) to maintain interest in captivity. 

I have experience that is against the commonly held belief that Tarantulas require small tanks, barren with little or no decor. 

I keep all my inverts in 2ft x 1ft x1ft tanks, provide them with live plants where possible, numerous hides and active residents (such as tropical woodlice -not so much for T's: webbing issues). 

From my studies watching them over countless hours, I feel that Tarantulas and invertebrates are given a raw deal - such utilitarian housing is not sufficient IMO. If you give a tarantula the space, it will use it from what I have seen- my Charlotte has "moved house" a few times in her tank, and appears to show no signs of stress - I have discovered that she often breaks the stems of ferns in the enclosure - to make her "bed" there. I presume the soft buds of the fern are nice to use, or are perhaps warmer than the surrounding substrate. She has webbed most of the 2ft space, and actively pursues crickets around the tank.

I am just saying this as I routinely see small, shoebox containers used for invertebrates, with no concern with natural habits. It's widley quoted here that tarantulas are sedentry, that they do not move - I would argue, and ask how many people have read scientific research on this? 

From my studies, I can show that many species of moderatly active burrowing spiders typically occupy a 1.1m2 territory - far larger than any shoebox. The spiders in question here were small - 1-2cm body length: does that mean that territory may scale up with some tarantula species? Is it constant? Is height important? My "terrestrial" curlyhair has been known to climb and take residence in plants - is it always due to stress? Perhaps it is simply use of an available habitat or microniche?

Such spiders and inverts routinely encounter other insects - aggressive and not. I have first hand experience that Whip Scorpions show no signs of stress when maintained in a Viv with springtails and woodlice, millipedes (small) and other such non dangerous animals. In fact, they seem to tolerate them, and often share the same hides with their prey items. I often wonder if invertebrates can feel boredom - so often have i seen 8" centipedes kept in tiny containers scarcely large enough for them to move around in - this I especially disagree with as centipedes are active predators that comb large swathes of ground in search of prey - what is natural in a 8" long box? What variation exists?

I am mainly wondering if people here think that habitat enrichment is pointless with inverts, or valuble - if you keep inverts in such shoebox conatiners, what are the reasons? Do you feel it replicates what they want in the wild? (notice I am not saying need here, need implies mimum standards, want implies better conditions). Does your Invert display any personality in such small utilitarian containers? Do you feel that enrichment is only for vertebrates? Are you doing it for time saving reasons? (eg less cleaning - in that case, I suggest you have too many pets!)

**I of course am referring to such set ups as main set ups - I am not having a go about sterile quarentine tanks and breeding set ups, they are simple for obvious reasons.**


----------



## Moosey (Jan 7, 2008)

that was really interesting! i keep my slings in things that are "too big" because i think its awful to keep them in film pots, and mine move about loads (And my juvie moves house like you said yours do)


----------



## _simon_ (Nov 27, 2007)

I am all for habitat enrichment. 

I moved my millipedes from this:









To this 60x45x60cm tank.









They now have plenty of different areas to explore, burrow and climb. Yes, it cost me a fair bit to set up but I believe it's a lot closer to what they would have in their natural environment.

My Curly is also in a bigger tank (45x30x30cm) than was suggested to me and she regularly goes for a walk about, not only over the substrate and decor but around the glass. Ideally I'd like to move her into a longer tank but at the moment space is an issue.










As you can see it's not just a plant pot and substrate.

I'm in the process of setting up my Pink Toe tank, it was given to me in a 15x30x15cm tank which I understand is perfectly fine, however I still wanted a larger one. Its new tank will be 30x30x30cm and will have 2 natural wooden hides that I found and hollowed out myself, coco substrate, lots of moss, silk plant and various other branches to climb around on. It's only a young spider so again at some point space allowing I will probably move it to a taller and wider tank.

My Mantids are currently in jars with silk plants but will be moved to larger, enriched tanks when I've finsihed the Pink Toe tank. 

I think the more there is to interact with the more of a natural environment you're creating and the happier the animal. That is assuming they have emotions and experience boredom.

I have nothing against people that go for the bare essentials, but I wonder how many have got set ups like that simply because they've never considered enrichment.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Thats some sweet set -ups - I like the curlyhair one especially. Im planning on posting some pics up of mine when I get some up to date ones. I totally agree that Tarantulas will use the space available to them.

I often wonder however - the "recommened" sizes often come from breeders shipping thousands of spiders - whilst they can draw some good advice from experience, is it really that useful for pet owners and not businesses? I mean, they have to fit thousands of spiders into an economic space - no different from cattle/livestock farming really. 

Whilst I do not mind this so much (its a business, something has to compromise eventually - as long as its not excessive cutbacks resulting in cruelty), it's not something I would replicate in my animals as PETS. 

Livestock is different - its fast in, fast out. A pet should be for a while, and its time should be as stimulating and stress free as possible, so thats why I often find it hard to think that such utilitarian housing is in the best interests of the animal - and I am sure that if everyone used nice big 2ft tanks, we would see less people with 60 tarantulas, accuiring one every other week.


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

I recently purchased a Theraposa Blondi juvenile. I have been watching her for about a week at my local reptile store, everytime I saw her she appeared to be trying to get out of the small plastic container she was in. In the end I bought her and after setting up with plant and hide and allowing an exoterra 45x45x45 to get to temperature I brought her home. She charged out of the tub and then stretched herself out on the floor of the viv. About an hour later she started exploring and everytime I look in the viv now she seems to be in a different place some high some low. She has explored everywhere, and she is just a baby, she definately seems happier and I would say that I am only now as she settles beginning to see her natural behaviour. Isnt watching the natural behaviour that makes them so interesting and isnt that why we buy and keep them?


----------



## Young_Gun (Jan 6, 2007)

I keep mine in the recommended size containers/housing and have never had a problem, I don't believe inverts have the 'awareness' to appreciate their surroundings, they can manipulate their surroundings and environment I agree but I don't feel that they are aware of the differences, its just something there that they find.

All of mine are kept with substrate, hide/s, water dish, possibly some plastic plants and I don't have any problems at all with mine.

I also think that the sizes of peoples collections comes into play here aswell, at one point I had over 350 tarantulas of varying sizes, these were personal ones that were nothing to do with any importing or selling on I did, with that amount tank maintenance took long enough without adding pretty things.


----------



## _simon_ (Nov 27, 2007)

I set up my new (enriched) Pink Toe tank today.


----------



## Becky (Mar 26, 2007)

As long as they have the necessary things, hide, water bowl, substrate and food.. they don't care if they have plants or not.. and when you have over 100 spiders, buying £40 tanks for everyone gets expensive!


----------



## C_Strike (Feb 20, 2007)

Agreed with Becky.
I keep most of mine in boxes that come to the approx value of... hmm... 20p maybe? lol
I do keep 9 or so in the exo terra show tanks, i will get a few more but only when i find a decent place to have another, lol

I occasionally change only a minor thing such as place a random item in the enclosure for a few days.
Even if its unneccessary, it still gives them somethiing to check out.
I only do that after about a year of them being in the sme tank, and then, i dont do it often!


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Part 1:




Young_Gun said:


> I keep mine in the recommended size containers/housing and have never had a problem, I don't believe inverts have the 'awareness' to appreciate their surroundings, they can manipulate their surroundings and environment I agree but I don't feel that they are aware of the differences, its just something there that they find.





Young_Gun said:


> All of mine are kept with substrate, hide/s, water dish, possibly some plastic plants and I don't have any problems at all with mine.
> 
> I also think that the sizes of peoples collections comes into play here aswell, at one point I had over 350 tarantulas of varying sizes, these were personal ones that were nothing to do with any importing or selling on I did, with that amount tank maintenance took long enough without adding pretty things.




I would disagree - inverts, and especially arachnids possess many physiological structures such as Trichobothria and setae hairs that allow them to experience the world in a way we cannot imagine. They are sensitive to air movements, static, vibrations and mechanical touch - they seem to be able to make sense of a struggling victim's movements and triangulate where it is coming from, even on large webbed structures. You may argue that an arachnid cannot tell between living and plastic plants, but I would disagree - live plants oscillate in circadian rhythms with sunlight - any webbing will also be affected as the plants makes slow and minute movements in its leaves and stems throughout the day. This might only be a nuisance to an arachnid, but it at least provides some stimulation.

They also taste" using their feet - whilst you might assume that this only applies to prey, subtle differences are noticed - terracotta will taste and feel different to plastic; peat will be different from coir. Perhaps that is why some tarantulas web more on certain substrates - it may simply be distasteful. Moisture may also affect this - I’ve certainly noticed that tarantulas seem to dislike excessively wet substrates.

You might find some studies on _Portia_ genus spiders interesting – recent research has found that this spider displays defined forward planning in order to hunt it’s prey – other spiders. This might not mean much, but forward planning in a scientific sense is very hard to display, so this is quite meaningful.

And I would stress that collection size is important – in my opinion, 350 spiders is excessive; they are no longer pets, more of a trophy. Do you describe multiples of dogs as a collection?

 It’s a matter of respect, which I think lacks in some of what users post here. They assume that these tarantulas are autonomotons, acting only on instinct, which is untrue – it’s a statement fashioned from ignorance. How many people here have studied spider physiology and behaviour? Young_gun, what can you actually tell me about the ecology and rhythmic behaviour of tarantulas? Do you know when they are active and when they are not – and I do not mean “They are active at night” because that is a gross simplification. 

I also see a lot of replies about cost and space – now, this might be a little hard to swallow, but it is not the spider’s fault that you may own 60+ tarantulas. Does that justification somehow allow the spider to less right to enrichment? Who suggests the minimal sized enclosure by the way? What is correct? In nature, there is no minimal size – I could suggest that it is possible to rear tarantulas in even smaller enclosures, by removal of legs. It has been done. Why is it that in almost every other form of pet keeping, that the conditions described in laboratories are smaller and more utilitarian than in pet keeping? Most pet keepers of reptiles for example, find lab settings disgusting – they are lab settings because the animal is for research, it’s a business. Why is an invert different?


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Part 2:

My opinion is that this is due to ignorance, and a lot of people display almost Victorian ideas about animals. These “truths” get banded around as kosher, yet they represent the MINIMUM – would you keep dogs or cats in the minimum enclosure? Do you keep reptiles in the minimum enclosure? 

To justify your opinion without reading about how a spider senses the world is foolish – ignorance of such abilities is not justification, nor is having a big collection. In my opinion again, having more than about 20 tarantulas will teach you nothing – Hell, I bet you can identify lots of species, which is impressive, but that has no correlation with what you actually know about spiders – behaviourally, physiologically and ecologically. Do you have an idea of daily or circadian rhythms? Do you understand prey preference? Hide selection? Do you allow our pets to experience seasonal differences? Do some of you even know where your pets locate? (and no, “Korea” or such is not an accurate description)

I think to justify utilitarian housing due to cost/time of having too many pets is unjustifiable. It is your choice to own so many, which should be allowed at the proviso that they are catered for. Quoting “minimum” specs is not a great idea – these are often generated from LD50 tests – that is how we know what temperature range animals can tolerate – you simply heat and cool them until a population suffers 50% mortality. Such is the way that they define these base values. Is that a good approach to pet keeping?


I would read these references if you would like to learn more (alas, I have access to the articles from my university, you would have to pay to read more than the abstract):

Predatory Behavior of Jumping Spiders - Annual Review of Entomology, 41(1):287 - First Page Image

This is a quick abstract on the jumping spider _Portia. _It is not a tarantula, but illustrates my point about sensory ability - and this spider has a brain the size of a grain of salt. It can adapt to differing micronhabitat conditions based on what it is hunting.

http://www.americanscientist.org/amsci/articles/98articles/jackson.html

Another on _Portia_, suggesting it can fine tune startagies to hunt various types of spiders.

Royal Society Publishing - Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (1990-) - Volume 354 - Number 1380/January 29, 1999 - p183-192 - Dynamics of arthropod filiform hairs. V. The response of spider trichobothria to natural stimuli - Journal Article
Here is an abstract about Trichobothria - in this particular species, they can detect fly movements up to 55cm away. Remember that almost all arachnids possess Trichobothria. 

BIOONE Online Journals - MONOAMINES IN THE BRAIN OF TARANTULAS (APHONOPELMA HENTZI) (ARANEAE, THERAPHOSIDAE): DIFFERENCES ASSOCIATED WITH MALE AGONISTIC INTERACTIONS

This is a study of monoamine concentration and how it can illustrate "mood" in competing male theraphosid spiders. Remember that mood is basically just chemical interactions in the brain - that goes for us as well...

I would love to provide access to lots of articles on invert mood and invert housing, but there simply are not many, or they have not been experimentally tested as of yet. However, when I speak to experts in the field of various inverts, they often state that they believe invertebrates to be more complex than generally thought, especially in terms of sensory ability and behaviour. 

I am not setting out here to deliberatly attack individuals for owning lots of inverts, rather I would like to perhaps get people to think about going for more than just the bare essentials, and assuming that invertebrates are just simple animals acting on instinct. As I have mentioned before, there are numerous ways that invertebrates can sense their environment that we cannot.


----------



## Vaughan69 (Nov 22, 2007)

That is a fantastic read, i completely agree on aspects like enrichment as i believe if you keep any sort of wild creature in captivity, the captive environment should simulate its own in the closest possible manner.

My Pandinus emperator enclosure has a running waterfall (silent) and real plants (although they are being swapped for fake as they arnt faring too well without adequate sunlight).


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Thats a fantastic set up, I saw when you first posted it up. Its a pity you are having hassle with the plants, I find them quite rewarding in vivs (providing you pick the correct type! heheeh).

Ok, that viv is probably a little on the expensive side, but it is a fantastic job. The point of this article is hopefully to get people away from the old school of thought about invertebrates and possibly start to become more interested in just how advanced they are. 

I am not expecting people to create vast slabs of accurate rainforest in their house, but hopefully people will start to move away from the shoebox and 1" of vermiculite padded cell enclosure. I think it is valuable to learn from pets, otherwise why keep them?


----------



## Becky (Mar 26, 2007)

GRB said:


> Part 2:
> 
> My opinion is that this is due to ignorance, and a lot of people display almost Victorian ideas about animals. These “truths” get banded around as kosher, yet they represent the MINIMUM – would you keep dogs or cats in the minimum enclosure? Do you keep reptiles in the minimum enclosure?
> 
> To justify your opinion without reading about how a spider senses the world is foolish – ignorance of such abilities is not justification, nor is having a big collection. In my opinion again, having more than about 20 tarantulas will teach you nothing – Hell, I bet you can identify lots of species, which is impressive, but that has no correlation with what you actually know about spiders – behaviourally, physiologically and ecologically. Do you have an idea of daily or circadian rhythms? Do you understand prey preference? Hide selection? Do you allow our pets to experience seasonal differences? Do some of you even know where your pets locate? (and no, “Korea” or such is not an accurate description)




Actually, having more than 20 tarantulas has taught me loads. I have varying species, and i watch and note all sorts of behaviour even with such a vast collection! 
I understand behaviour, physiologically and ecologically. Look at taxonomists collections .. do their spiders have vines, plants and god knows what else in?? NO! And they understand them better than "us lot" ever will. 
Prey preference.. yep understand that. Some of my spids won't take black crickets, some won't take browns, some won't take pinks/fluffs, some won't take mealies or locusts so i understand that bit.
All of my spiders experience seasonal and daily differences, temp drop at night etc And my breeding spiders all have seasonal differences - wet and dry seasons etc (My versi's and minatrix are having their dry spell now) And yep.. i know where all of my spiders live in the wild...

So all my spiders live in cereal tubs without vines, plants etc.. yet i know all this. So whats your point??


----------



## Young_Gun (Jan 6, 2007)

GRB - All I need to know is that all my spiders are healthy and happy, yes they are happy because they would not eat, moult perfectly usually if they were not.

How I keep them is purely down to my personal preference, maybe as your an aspiring arachnologist as you put it, then when you are studying a large number of spiders that are in YOUR possesion not from studies you read or information you receive/glean from other keepers then you might be less inclined to call people who have been keeping inverts with almost no fatalaties due to any human error for 10 years ignorant.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

I'm not gonna argue with people here, but I gotta say if/when i get T's they will have proper, natural(-ish) housing.

Aside from anything tarantulas are more display pets in many ways... why not display them well.

Also just because they're so different (and simpler in many ways) than us doesn't mean they don't recognize differences in the world around them, and to a certain extent enjoy them.

Remember people, until somewhat recently people didn't even think a chicken was aware enough to warrant anything more than the bare minimum in environmental stimulus. 

Hell, it might be the case that a lot of these "pet hole" tarantulas are not in fact pet holes at all, if you give them sufficient cover and environmental obstacles. Its happened before in many other species.

None the less, I'm still a total newb, but I think it should be considered.


----------



## Vaughan69 (Nov 22, 2007)

GRB said:


> Thats a fantastic set up, I saw when you first posted it up. Its a pity you are having hassle with the plants, I find them quite rewarding in vivs (providing you pick the correct type! heheeh).
> 
> Ok, that viv is probably a little on the expensive side, but it is a fantastic job. The point of this article is hopefully to get people away from the old school of thought about invertebrates and possibly start to become more interested in just how advanced they are.
> 
> I am not expecting people to create vast slabs of accurate rainforest in their house, but hopefully people will start to move away from the shoebox and 1" of vermiculite padded cell enclosure. I think it is valuable to learn from pets, otherwise why keep them?


It wasnt cheap, but it depends what your willing to spend, apart from the effort (and the scorpion lol) the actual setup could be brought and made for about 70 quid which i agree is rather pricey. BUT no cost at all when you can observe the scorp in a relatively natural habitat. 

I wanted to start experimenting with beetles in there as well but wasnt sure how it would effect the equilibrium. I already have isopods in there as 'cleaners' (although i havnt seen them lately lol) but wanted to try something like Smaragdesthes africana to see how they would co-exist (or not as the case may be lol) 

Note: Im expecting people to say they would not mix species blah blah blah BUT it is just a suggestion and i have seen positive results from it so WILL be trying it. I dont want to anger anyone here (their opinions are MORE than welcome as long as they are *constructive*) as i know how much some people do not approve of this. I will keep you informed though how this goes..... sorry for the semi hijack lol


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Becky said:


> Actually, having more than 20 tarantulas has taught me loads. I have varying species, and i watch and note all sorts of behaviour even with such a vast collection!
> I understand behaviour, physiologically and ecologically. Look at taxonomists collections .. do their spiders have vines, plants and god knows what else in?? NO! And they understand them better than "us lot" ever will.
> Prey preference.. yep understand that. Some of my spids won't take black crickets, some won't take browns, some won't take pinks/fluffs, some won't take mealies or locusts so i understand that bit.
> All of my spiders experience seasonal and daily differences, temp drop at night etc And my breeding spiders all have seasonal differences - wet and dry seasons etc (My versi's and minatrix are having their dry spell now) And yep.. i know where all of my spiders live in the wild...
> ...


Well, firstly, a taxonomist collection is often a fixed collection (i.e dead and preserved). I don't know many taxonomists who use living specimens more frequently than dead - and my university has a dead collection in _it's_ taxonomy museum, i'll send you links to it if you like.

Secondly, taxonomy is the study of morphological characters in order to classify life on earth into kingdoms, orders and genus etc. They do not neccessarily understand the animal in question's physiology and behaviour, as quite often they are presented with dead specimens. Again, i'll send you a link to a new solifuge species if you like described from a dead specimin. Its very common to use dead specimins in taxonomy, so living conditions are hardly important.

Please don't include me in "us lot", as we all have various levels of knowledge about arachnids and science here. I will admit I am no expert on hobby keeping, but similarily, I am not new to _scientific _study of arachnids. I have studied physiology, ecology and taxonomy _of arachnids _and other groups of organisms. I own scientific text on specific details of their biology, that you will not find in any caresheet. I am discussing my points in a scientific manner, hence the references. 

3) *What* do you understand about physiology _per se_? Your statement doesnt really answer much. Osmoregulation, mechanoreception, chemoreception etc are all aspects of physiology - if you truly understood them, you would have argued about my specific points rather than glazing over them suggesting that you truly know them from observations on keeping a few species in captivity. How does captive observation enable you to understand how Trichobothria function for example? How does that somehow disprove my point?

Quoting things that appear on caresheets doesn't really display an understanding of physiology - feel free to discuss further if you wish. 

And young_gun: 

I have studied ecdysis - and I will tell you straight out that even if you're invert was the most stressed it has ever been, it cannot stop moulting. Invertebrates will shed even if it will 100% kill them, it is a chemically controlled sequence of events and is not really controlled by the invert as such. 

You cannot tell "happiness" from basic functions such as eating and shedding. That would be like assuming that a human female is completely happy because she experiences a period. Again, she doesnt exactly have a vast degree of control over this, so it doesn't particularily matter if she is bored, it will still occur.

There have been lots of experiments producing graphs known as "tolerance polygons". These map physiological responses and the minimum limits for certain functions such as reproduction, feeding and movement. What you have to realise that base functions will carry on as long as the organism is still alive. More energy costly processes will occur when it is least stressed. 

Here is a polygon for tolerance:

http://www.usd.edu/biol/faculty/swanson/ecophys/pics/Tolerance Polygon.jpg

Its not the best one I have seen, but it will give you the gist of my point. 

Also, If I were to own a large collection (unlikely, and for one, I would not refer to them a as "collection", as if they were stamps or something), they would be housed naturally. 

Size of collection should be irrelevant to quality of housing. Zoos have large collections of primates, but they don't skimp on housing them - or should they, based on your own logic? Primates can be seen to be "happy" in that they used to feed and reproduce in zoos many years ago. They survived in conditions that we would now consider appalling in terms of social interaction and richness. What is different in what you suggested from this sort of example? Why dont you ask the TSKA members about enrichment? The whole point is that it is not meant to be the bare minimum - it is an act of caring about improving an animals life past the bog standard laboratory conditions. In any other exotic pet (eg reptiles, torts etc) keeping animals on par with a laboratory if frowned upon - why not in invertebrates?


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

GRB said:


> I also see a lot of replies about cost and space – now, this might be a little hard to swallow, but it is not the spider’s fault that you may own 60+ tarantulas. Does that justification somehow allow the spider to less right to enrichment? Who suggests the minimal sized enclosure by the way? What is correct? In nature, there is no minimal size – I could suggest that it is possible to rear tarantulas in even smaller enclosures, by removal of legs. It has been done. Why is it that in almost every other form of pet keeping, that the conditions described in laboratories are smaller and more utilitarian than in pet keeping? Most pet keepers of reptiles for example, find lab settings disgusting – they are lab settings because the animal is for research, it’s a business. Why is an invert different?


I agree and although not wanting to offend, I do wander why some people keep so many unless of course they are breeding them on a commercial basis or doing research because don't we all want to give our pets the best possible lives that we can. I seriously do wander if many of these spiders are only kept as status symbols as they are sadly still feared by many and keeping them might make some people feel cool!


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

I agree r.e. the number of tarantulas, ever Heard the phrase quality over quantity?


I was also gonna make the point earlier about the fact that an animal is alive not meaning its as good as it could be. After all, people live in prison perfectly healthily, does that mean they're happy? OK, to a tarantula happy is probably a cricket, but that doesn't mean its the limit of happiness.

Also in reference to my earlier point about pet holes I'd like to qualify that (partly). I keep fish, I have for years, and one thing I know is that some fish,if kept in a lightly planted tank will never be seen, but if kept in a heavily planted tank will be seen more. Reason being that the safer a naturally reclusive animal feels the more likely it is to be active and visible.

Most animals behave differently outside their natural environment.


----------



## pecks (Dec 29, 2007)

Their are arguments for and against each, statistics can be used to back up your arguments either way! The Big set ups for your inverts are excellent, equally keeping a large number of spiders "Healthy" requires a good degree of time and skill. Their are always more than one way to skin a cat! I keep inverts in both sorts of set up, and similiar creatures in both sorts of set up, neither set up seems to affect health or activity. I spent this afternoon in my shed, found a spider in a jam jar under a pile of newspapers, it choose to live there. Whats the point i hear you all scream! If it works for you it works. We are all individuals and therefore entitled to our own opinions, we are all different. If your creatures are happy and well i think that is the most important thing at the end of the day. Bet this opens a can of worms!!!


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

The main thrust of this was basically to highlight the dichotomy between the way inverts are treated and vertebrates in terms of captive housing.

The spider in the shed; well, its true. Some species will chose someof the oddest places however, scale it up. How big was that jam jar to the spider? You could argue that the whole shed was technically the enclosure and not the jam jar, which is simply the hide...

Also, you have to realise is that opinions can be seen to be fine one day and not the next. What is ok today, might not be tommorrow - see my example of primate care. Those people were not doing it to be downright nasty, its just that current opinion has shown this to be insufficient. Perhaps current invertebrate opinion is also not in the best interest of the animal.


----------



## pecks (Dec 29, 2007)

Not meaning to offend and i agree completely that inverts do get treated different to vertebrates. how many people keep livefood in the tub it arrives in without extra food or water before it dies? Be intereting to see how this thread goes!


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

pecks said:


> Not meaning to offend and i agree completely that inverts do get treated different to vertebrates. how many people keep livefood in the tub it arrives in without extra food or water before it dies? Be intereting to see how this thread goes!


My live food always on arriving home gets transferred to a larger clean container with fresh food, water gel, carrot, potatoes and several dark places. They always appear thirsty. :whistling2:


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

I transfer mine to another larger container with substrate and new food. 

Lets define something here however; Live food is not a pet. If I were to keep crickets for reasons other than killing them, I would keep them in natural conditions. Since they are food however, bred for that purpose alone, I treat them as you would in a laboratory.

It is alas, alive, but it is not on equal status to a pet - unless of course you want to treat winalot dog food on par with how you treat your dog.


----------



## _simon_ (Nov 27, 2007)

My crickets that are coming tomorrow will be in a glass tank with substrate, bark and branches. They'll be fed fresh fruit and feeder food.


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

i look at it this way, if the spiders weren't happy with their enviroment then they would suffer stress and this would show up in their basic behaviour as it does in ANY animal. They would not eat, drink or reproduce and certainly wouldnt live as long as they do


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

The better health condition your live food is in the better food it makes therefore looking after the pet better. Surely?


----------



## _simon_ (Nov 27, 2007)

Adsusian said:


> The better health condition your live food is in the better food it makes therefore looking after the pet better. Surely?


I just find it difficult to treat live food purely as food. I kept crickets in a large tub with little else in for a while and felt guilty about it.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Muze said:


> i look at it this way, if the spiders weren't happy with their enviroment then they would suffer stress and this would show up in their basic behaviour as it does in ANY animal. They would not eat, drink or reproduce and certainly wouldnt live as long as they do


Read my comments on the polygon of tolerance. "normal" behaviour such as eating cant be relied upon 100% as signs of no stress.


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

_simon_ said:


> I just find it difficult to treat live food purely as food. I kept crickets in a large tub with little else in for a while and felt guilty about it.


I feel sorry for the ones left in the shop they'd be better eaten than left to die like that.


----------



## Becky (Mar 26, 2007)

Hedgewitch said:


> I agree r.e. the number of tarantulas, ever Heard the phrase quality over quantity?


So you're saying because i have more than 5 that they're kept crap and look crap??? Would they breed, feed, moult etc successfully if they were??


----------



## Miranda (Dec 25, 2006)

Becky said:


> So you're saying because i have more than 5 that they're kept crap and look crap??? Would they breed, feed, moult etc successfully if they were??


His point was that even if they do basic bodily functions that doesnt mean they are brilliantly looked after, i know v little about T's so i wont comment on someones housing,and hes saying that often when people have many they are not as well have looked after and many people who own loads have said that themselves in this thread.


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

when i had 1 it was looked after in exactly the same way as the 20 plus i have now...


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

A transect of people on this forum are taking this personally, which is completely the wrong attitude to have. I intened this thread to perhaps open people to new ideas about invertebrates, which are often veiwed as being simple mindless creatures.

Simply put, everyone can only act on the information they have. What is so bad about someone coming and sharing something else? 

Some of you suggest you love tarantulas - to which, I wonder why you did not react "oh, thats very interesting, I had never heard of trichobothria being able to sense insects 55cm away, etc". What is so wrong with taking this information and using it? 

Current opinion _changes._ As i've said before, I wanted to illustrate this, and I used the analogy of primate care and enrichment. Times change, perhaps 50 years from now, people will gasp at how inverts used to be cared for, perhaps not. 

I don't care if no one else here has studied physiology, what I do care about is almost hostile replies when I discuss aspects of it often overlooked. From what I gather, not many people here knew of trichbothria or setae, they were not aware of _Portia_ spiders or of other such studies on tarantula behaviour. 

All I have done is put them forward as an arguement that invertebrates are not so simple and "stupid", and that perhaps we should provide more stimulus as responsible pet owners (which differentiates us from the business end of things). I don't understand such vehemence, because if I had substituted "dog" for tarantula, no one would argue against me. 

There has been a bunch of replies lacking any sort of actual information and just stating veiwpoints, often seperated from any sort of actual research. At least I backed up my own veiwpoints with scientific studies. I do care about invertebrate welfare, and I will happily provide proof to back up my statements. 

This is not meant to make people feel stupid - ignorance is a perfectly useable word to describe something you are unaware of. I do not understand various things; I am ignorant to them. It is the way you react to new information that defines intellegence or stupidity. Some people on here have greeted such a thread and remarked that it is interesting. Others have remarked upon it without any real evidence to back up such statements. To me, that shows people stuck in their habits and unwilling to adapt to new ideas that might threaten their own. Its not a competiton, in the end the winner should be the pets.


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

There is many things in life we do not understand like why do camels scream on arriving at the abatoires even though they cannot see what is going on inside? How do dogs see cancer? How does my Giant White Knee know that there is a cricket hiding on top of the exo terra background when she can't see it or hear it but she is heading up there anyway to get it? How can some people tell the future? I expect all these will be understood a lot better some time in the future with the various generations of people all brighter than me doing their research into all fields.


----------



## Young_Gun (Jan 6, 2007)




----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

So im ignorant, stupid and stuck in my ways...IN YOUR OPINION...tbh mate i dont care:lol2:


----------



## Zak (Jan 7, 2008)

Adsusian said:


> There is many things in life we do not understand like why do camels scream on arriving at the abatoires even though they cannot see what is going on inside? How do dogs see cancer? How does my Giant White Knee know that there is a cricket hiding on top of the exo terra background when she can't see it or hear it but she is heading up there anyway to get it? How can some people tell the future? I expect all these will be understood a lot better some time in the future with the various generations of people all brighter than me doing their research into all fields.


I cant see how any of these examples really futher this thread. Most of things you've quoted there are anecdotal, where as the spider one is proven by science and has been covered in previous posts on this thread. This is more about enrichment and peoples attitudes towards it than what we dont know about irrelevant topics.

Im very pro enclosure enrichment and wish to study it for my dissertation. For years primates and large mammals have been at the forefront of it but only now have we started to realise birds and reptiles are just as suspectible to stress and require enrichment. Why dont invertebrates fall into this? As GRB has shown through scientific evidence, by people who've spent years researching this topic, that arachnids and invertebrates are not as simple as we once thought.

I dont get why when someone who wishes to impart their knowledge and ideas that everyone gets upperty because of a little criticism. The scientific studies arent anecdotal, they're done for a reason. Do you really think by keeping some tarantulas for a few years you can argue with their individual and pooled knowledge of who knows how many years?


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

maybe its the way its imparted...not the actual info:whistling2:

And i have kept T's for 10 plus years and also know others on here that have just as much experience


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Muze said:


> So im ignorant, stupid and stuck in my ways...IN YOUR OPINION...tbh mate i dont care:lol2:


You advertise the pro keepers lobby and you have that attitude?

Funnily enough, other pro-keepers seem to be more enrichment keen. 

If you actually read my thread, you would understand what I was saying. We are all ignorant of issues. Do you believe you know all about everything? 

You're reply suggests to me that you don't really know much about what you preach. *Read *what I _*actually*_ write first, then reply making personal comments if you still wish. I suggested that everyone was ignorant to some degree, myself included. I am not an expert on everything, but I can sit here and talk about *arachnids *with belief that my opinions are valid, and in some cases more informed.


----------



## Becky (Mar 26, 2007)

Young_Gun said:


>


You're great!! :lol2::lol2:


----------



## Dirtydozen (Feb 7, 2007)

Young_Gun said:


>


 
LMFAO


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

GRB said:


> You advertise the pro keepers lobby and you have that attitude?
> 
> Funnily enough, other pro-keepers seem to be more enrichment keen.
> 
> ...


 
you are obviously on here just looking for an argument etc, so im not longer gonna waste my time replying to you


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

Young_Gun said:


>


i actually roflmao at that :no1:


----------



## Adsusian (Feb 16, 2008)

Zak said:


> I cant see how any of these examples really futher this thread. Most of things you've quoted there are anecdotal, where as the spider one is proven by science and has been covered in previous posts on this thread. This is more about enrichment and peoples attitudes towards it than what we dont know about irrelevant topics.


 I personally dont think it is anecdotal if you have stood, watched and heard camels screaming for know apparent reason other than where they are.

I would also assume working at Jersey Zoo in the reptile room and at one time being very good friends with Gerald Durrell because I had a certain knack definately does mean that that I have am disqualified for having an opinion. Especially when it is an opinion on behalf of the animal. I am oh so glad that all we will ever need to know about tarantulas has already been discovered and is written on this forum! Why on earth did I waste my time and join?


----------



## snickers (Aug 15, 2007)

> people on this forum are taking this personally

The way I perceived it was that you posted saying that people shouldn't keep more than a few tarantulas, and that any tarantulas we did keep had to be kept in naturalistic conditions.
Not only that but when some people put contrary arguements you refuted them, effectively saying they were wrong and you were right. Thus re-inforcing my original impression. A phrase like "What you have to realise is..." does not encourage me to debate an issue.

Now that may or not be what you said, and it seems like it's not what you intended, that's how it came across to me.

however...

Spiders and dogs are not analogues, even less so primates. Spiders are among the strangest animals on the planet. They are about as far removed from dogs as it's possible to get without being a fungus.

No-one knows enough about spiders to be too certain how they should be kept. We know hardly anything about how they interact with their environment, how/why they moult for instance. Almost all we know about breeding spiders has come from petkeepers as far as I can tell. We do know that we can keep some spiders and get them to breed by giving them certain conditions. In other animals it's difficult to get them to breed successfully if they aren't kept right. It's probable, but n ot certain) that the same is true of spiders. What is certain is that we all have a lot to learn.

In my opinion, and that's all it is, is that spiders don't 'think'. They sense their environment, and interact with it. They build burrows because thats what spiders do. I don't think that their intellect goes much beyond that. They really are pretty much automatons, and that is part of their attraction.

As for housing, I'm all for giving spiders bigger homes than 'recommended' within reason, and a variety of 'decorations'. Not so much in favour of toys and such. I think that would stress spiders.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Adsusian said:


> I personally dont think it is anecdotal if you have stood, watched and heard camels screaming for know apparent reason other than where they are.
> 
> I would also assume working at Jersey Zoo in the reptile room and at one time being very good friends with Gerald Durrell because I had a certain knack definately does mean that that I have am disqualified for having an opinion. Especially when it is an opinion on behalf of the animal. I am oh so glad that all we will ever need to know about tarantulas has already been discovered and is written on this forum! Why on earth did I waste my time and join?


Anecdotal is simply a reference to the fact that you are saying it in the lines of "my friend say he saw this" or "I saw/have heard of". Non anecdotal evidence is reports cited from scientific papers or books. 

Your sarcasm doesnt exactly aid anything here because you plainly know very little about arachnid science in general. If anything, arachnid science is understudied, and many questiosn remain. That is not an excuse to simply assume anything.

I am not sure why you did join, as you seem pretty incapable of hearing new ideas without assuming its a personal dig. Until today, this thread had nothing to do with you, so I dont see where that actually came from.


----------



## Young_Gun (Jan 6, 2007)

GRB said:


> Anecdotal is simply a reference to the fact that you are saying it in the lines of "my friend say he saw this" or "I saw/have heard of". Non anecdotal evidence is reports cited from scientific papers or books.
> 
> Your sarcasm doesnt exactly aid anything here because you plainly know very little about arachnid science in general. If anything, arachnid science is understudied, and many questiosn remain. That is not an excuse to simply assume anything.
> 
> I am not sure why you did join, as you seem pretty incapable of hearing new ideas without assuming its a personal dig. Until today, this thread had nothing to do with you, so I dont see where that actually came from.


What experience do you have with keeping and observing invertebrates first hand?

Not information from studies or papers that have NOT been conducted by yourself?


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

Hello,

I am not looking to argue with you personally, but it appears that you are not reading what I am actually saying, and perceiving it as a personal attack. Certainly, the second post in response to your sarcastic reply was.

If you want to make a reasoned discussion then by all means talk to me. Saying that you have 10 years of experience and then ignoring my posts on various other points to me doesnt seem like much of a discussion. 10 years of experience is quite useful,but it is 10 years of keeping them as a pet, not 10 years of scientific research. 

I am discussing science, so anecdotal reports from breeders is only so useful compared to studies peer reviewed by experts with even more experience than yourself.

Regards,

Grant.

You really are arrogant...leave me the hell alone and stop PMing me:bash:


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

snickers said:


> > people on this forum are taking this personally
> 
> The way I perceived it was that you posted saying that people shouldn't keep more than a few tarantulas, and that any tarantulas we did keep had to be kept in naturalistic conditions.
> Not only that but when some people put contrary arguements you refuted them, effectively saying they were wrong and you were right. Thus re-inforcing my original impression. A phrase like "What you have to realise is..." does not encourage me to debate an issue.
> ...


1) I suggested that keeping lots of tarantulas tended towards shoebox culture, which is at odds with enrichment - which I think is a valid assessment.

2)I refuted them with scientific literature studies. What is wrong with pulling thousands of people's reserach into a concise arguement? The arguements were based around an individual's experience, whereas mine relied on countless reports. Surely it is better to have many documented cases rather than one or two reports?

3) We do know why they moult. Its because an exoskeleton cannot grow or stretch, and an exoskeleton is pretty much key to being an arthropod. I deliberatly chose such studies to show you that scientists do have an idea how they sense the world. I'm not going to post them again, as I presume you have read them based on waht you were saying. 

You have to admit, that me talking about an exoskeleton here is hardly agreeing with your statement - but will you take offense to such correction? I mean no slur with it, I am simply telling you a simple answer.

4) I cannot decide if the information does come from the hobby or not. You have to remember that pretty much all exotic pets only become available to pet keepers after they are often kept in science. It's hardly a coincidence that solifuges are available and there is already a hefty scientific volume on them. Look at books on tarantuals etc - they were allused in scientific studies way before they were available to the masses.

5)I agree with your sentiments on housing. I would not agree with spiders being the strangest animals on the planet (they are pretty much typical arthropods when you compare them to some of the odd sister taxa).

6) The point of this post was to make people consider that inverts might be closer to the status of a dog or whatever than previously thought. If you still feel that inverts are far inferior to vertebrates then so be it, but hopefully some of the stuff I have posted might make you re-consider how complex you veiw invertebrates. 

Now, a lot of arguments would be avoided if people would take the time to properly read what I am saying. Read the papers, discover some new things. I knew this would be controversial, and yes, I knew this would likely have two camps, but I hoped that people would at the very least have read my posts thoroughly as to avoid any confusion.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Muze said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am not looking to argue with you personally, but it appears that you are not reading what I am actually saying, and perceiving it as a personal attack. Certainly, the second post in response to your sarcastic reply was.
> 
> ...


Oh well, I tried to be civil. I think you are quite immature. You get the wrong end of the stick, and then you wont back down when it's clearly not what I meant. If you think I am arogant, you should see that what you are basically doing is arguing with years and years of science. What the hell would trained proffessional know compared to you eh?


----------



## Muze (Jun 20, 2007)

ive asked nicely for you to leave me alone and you wont, you insist on pming me...what exactly is your problem?


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Young_Gun said:


> What experience do you have with keeping and observing invertebrates first hand?
> 
> Not information from studies or papers that have NOT been conducted by yourself?


Do you understand how science works? 

Someone studies something. They report their findings. It is peer reveiwed by other experts and either rejected or accepted. Further work continues.

Its perfectly acceptable for you or anyone to quote a peer reveiwed paper back to me. The whole point is to allow people to continue research - if you had to start from scratch every time, no one would prgress past much more than about 30 years of research. 

I have first hand experience of inverts. I am planning a dissertation thesis on studies involving harvestmen. I would consider my experience pretty extensive, as simply put, it is more than just the hobby side. Take this as arrogant if you like, but any 13 year old can learn much of the information on the hobbuy side in about a year. Why dont you learn some of the academic side? 

I don't own 350 species, so does that somehow make me less qualified than you to discuss arachnids then?


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Muze said:


> ive asked nicely for you to leave me alone and you wont, you insist on pming me...what exactly is your problem?


That you got the wrong end of the stick basically, and when I try to explain you get uppity and call me arrogant. It's not my problem that you did not read what my post actually said. Keep replying here by all means, its amusing and petty.

Also, I pm'ed you once...whats the big deal?


----------



## Young_Gun (Jan 6, 2007)

GRB said:


> Do you understand how science works?
> 
> Someone studies something. They report their findings. It is peer reveiwed by other experts and either rejected or accepted. Further work continues
> 
> ...


I have learnt a good deal on the academic side, but as I am not interested in the academic as much as I am on the 'hobby' side.

No, the amount you own has only been raised as a moot point by yourself.

I am happy in the knowledge that my spiders are healthy in the environments I keep them in and I will continue to do so.

Your attitude is possibly the reason you have received such a negative response to this thread?


----------



## Snakes r grreat (Aug 21, 2006)

Closed at thread starters request.


----------

