# primates



## irwin (Jan 22, 2008)

so why is it that so many people are against private primate keepers,what can a zoo or game park give a primate more than what i can give them,why are zoos and associations against private keepers why why why as soon as you mention you keep primates(i am only speaking about small primates marmies and tamarins) people say should you be keeping them ,why cant we.Whats the diffence between a zoo keeping them than a private keeper in the right sort of environment,it does make me cringe when i hear that people keep them in parrot cages,or in the living room,this is not right this just takes the pee out of people that care for these animals correctly,why do people want one that is only a few months old they should be left with there parents until atleast approx a year you cant class these as pets you cant have them running around your living room this is just not right,they only do this so as not to spend a lot of money on a decent enslosure if you cant afford to then dont get one.You cant tame primates it dosent matter if you get one at 6 weeks old i more or less quantee that when they reach adult maturity that they will bite you,they might attack you and is this the time that you think this is not for me and another primate is moved on,people that keep primates why dont you come forward and say what enclosure/environment you keep them in,if you keep it in a parrot cage then say why u think this is right if you dont then you know what you are doing is wrong also organisations put your thought across i know that they search forums but tell me why private keepers should not keep them and anyone else who has a thought. This is enough of my ranting i just get peeed off with people telling us what we can keep and i do agree with people keeping any animal in the right environment but if they was to ban any one specimen kept in bad husbandry would we be keeping anything.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

if one can keep a species of primate in a manner that is condusive to their well being and satisfies all of their needs then i see nothing wrong with it. as a teen, my best friend had a pet squirrel monkey and it was perfectly content... i dare say happy. no problems whatsoever. they were maybe lucky, i can't say but that monkey was cool as can be. i was around it for a couple of years and there were no problems at all... nice as can be.

primates are very demanding and emotional. they like parrots can go nuts. if you are willing to invest in them like a zoo and provide zoo quality care i say go for it to anyone. ... some people just think that they are so cuddly and that's as far as they get into what it takes to keep primates. as intelligent as primates are, they deserve nothing but they best care.

just my opinion guys...


----------



## rachel132002 (Dec 4, 2006)

I dunno where i sit on this, if someone has the time for them and can have more than one and provide a good space or let them loose in the home then fine i have more issues with those who keep one on its own when it'd naturally be in a group and in a small cage with nothing much to do etc. I've never made up my mind on keeping them they're something i'd love but i think i'd always worry that deep down it'd be miserable being in a confined space not swinging free in trees. Just me though, i won't say i'd never have one because i know me and i end up with everything lol.


----------



## Zak (Jan 7, 2008)

I dont really get the relevance of the post are you pro or anti primate keeping? And god is it hard to read without any punctuation.

Im totally pro keepers having whatever they want as long as they can provide sufficient care for it. People who dont keep animals correctly are basically abusing them, whether through intent or ignorance. This should be made a punishable offence. It takes nothing to research up on a animal and learn the basics, something alot of people miss out.

A zoo for example employs experts, someone who is a specialist in that animal and spends their career caring for animals, theres usually more than one person involved in their keeping. Theres almost always a keeper close by 24/7 with an exotic trained vet on sight or on call. They have budgets for enclosures wildly out of the league of most keepers and consult other experts regarding it all. Most keepers without thousands and thousands of pounds cant compete with zoo's, its a totally different ball game.

I dont think zoo's are against private keepers, more against people who get into it for the wrong reason and dont really have the animals best interests at heart. People see monkeys and think cuddly baby like animals, which is totally wrong. They're complex, intelligent, strong and possibly aggressive animals that have very specific and high requirements and needs. If you can successfuly recreate this within a private setting then most keepers and zoo's will be more than happy with you.


----------



## bosshogg (Nov 19, 2006)

sorry i found that very hard to read (i thought i was bad!) you are saying what can a zoo give a primate that a private keeper cant lets hink mmm enclousres much bigger, enviroment aenrichment, trained (very experienced) staff looking after them, vet there when needed , specialised diet thats what a zoo can give a primate.

i think your rant does nothing to sway me that primates should be kept privatley.

Clare


----------



## Evie (Jan 28, 2008)

I might be completely wrong here but I think that the justification for zoos is that it is written in the licensing laws or somewhere that education is an integral part of what they do as well as conservation.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

I find a very small relevance between zoos and specialist parks housing primates and private keepers housing primates.

I don't need to relist the difference between the financial belefits and specialist assistance benefits a zoo could offer as people have already done so.

I am very much pro keeping - I think any keeper who can offer the full and correct care and environment to an animal should have the freedom to do so but, let's face it, more and mroe people are creeping out of the woodwork with animals they have rushed into buying for all of the wrong reasons and are happily complacent towards the lackings of the care and environment they are offering.

I would love to see more people saying "yes I keep primates and I keep them damn well" but this is not the case at present. 

Hopefully, the COP's will come in to play and offer some form of protection for primates from those people who wish to house them in thier living rooms and in parrot cages on thier own with no stimulation from thier own kind.

It would be good though if you could be a little more specific with your thread though - are you a primate keeper yourself, is it a field of keeping you plan to go into?


----------



## Mason (Jan 21, 2008)

simple answer is zoos etc are generally against people keeping primates because the overwhelmingly huge majority would not provide the correct enclosure,diet, treatment etc etc etc.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Hi Irwin, 

Forgive me, but l had to relay your text bundle into a form l could respond to correctly.

Rory

So why is it, that so many people are against private primate keepers?
What can a zoo or game park give a primate more than what I can give them?

Why are zoos and associations against private keepers why, why, why?
As soon as you mention you keep primates (I am only speaking about small primates marmies and tamarins) people say should you be keeping them, why cant we?

What’s the difference between a zoo keeping them, than a private keeper in the right sort of environment?

It does make me cringe when I hear that people keep them in parrot cages, or in the living room, this is not right, this just takes the pee out of people that care for these animals correctly, why do people want one that is only a few months old? They should be left with their parents until at least approx. a year. 

You cant class these as pets, you cant have them running around your living room this is just not right, they only do this so as not to spend a lot of money on a decent enclosure if you cant afford to then dont get one! You can’t tame primates it doesn’t matter if you get one at 6 weeks old I more or less guarantee that when they reach adult maturity that they will bite you! 

They might attack you and is this the time that you think this is not for me and another primate is moved on. 

People, those keep primates why dont you come forward and say what enclosure/environment you keep them in? 

If you keep it in a parrot cage, then say why u think this is right? If you don’t, then you know what you are doing is wrong!

Also organisations put your thought across I know that they search forums but tell me why private keepers should not keep them, and anyone else who has a thought. 

This is enough of my ranting I just get peed off with people telling us what we can keep, and I do agree with people keeping any animal in the right environment but if they were to ban any one specimen kept in bad husbandry would we be keeping anything?


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Okay, well l can see that our little chat the other day upset you, so much so for you to come into the forum here and blast away ...... good show, but l did find it difficult to read.:whistling2::blush: So felt for your thread to make more impact, it would help if fellow keepers could see what you were saying and that you were pro keeping.

External organizations that oppose the keeping of primates as indeed those who are also keepers whom are against primate keeping are as such because of a number of different issues and emotions.

The anti establshment feels the way they do because they can not see how any primate can be kept in the 'real time environment' that it is as a species deserving. Fellow keepers who are anti primate keeping feel this way in reality for very much the same reasoning.

It is a long held debate and belief that the private keeper can sustain primates in their collections if they do so correctly, and that all needs are met - housing, environmental, stimulation, diet and care. Additionally the argument that many keepers can perform this equally as well if not better than the zoos is long standing.

Zoos are governed by boards of directors and of course administrational and financial cuts, so that the belief that the private keeper whom is not restrained by these issues can do as much as a decent job as do the zoos, but possibly do it slightly better due to an independant income that is not restricted by administrations.

The argument against private care is not new, it is as said long standing. Primates have been under political debate for a good many years now, and those that oppose this species being kept, are campaigning against it - to the eyes of many perhaps for good reason -you and I both know Irwin that many keepers do not research sufficiently, never have and many never will as long as primates are sold by those who themselves do not undertake any kind of research into whom is buying their animals.

In recent months we have seen on this forum alone, cases where animals should not have been purchased and indeed not sold, for they have gone to the wrong keepers, and on this premise alone, it is not just primates that l am referring to.

More responsibility needs to taken on board, by private sellers, by private buyers, by retailers. Once this achieved only then will we start to see the results of good practice and then slowly we could make a difference.

But alas, l feel that good practices may now be falling upon and viewed by deaf ears and blind eyes. For the campaigns against primate keeping in private hands have already commenced by the likes of the RSPCA and of course Monkeyworld.

I too become frustrated when l hear of keepers refering to primates as pets, for indeed this is not what they are, they are an exotic species. But as soon as the word pet is mentioned with this species, it does set to inflame the various opposition orders and rightly so. For once 'pet' is tagged onto it, it appears that many people seemingly disregard any respect for that animal in many cases.

I think more primate keepers do need to voice their opinions, and most assuredly more keepers need to come out of the woodwork and address this issue of private ownership. For failure to comply with this little political issue, could well result in the ability of many species to be kept in our futures.

Rory Matier
PKLKA


----------



## kirk300780 (Mar 12, 2008)

*care of primates*

hi guys
I may be knew to this site however what i would like to add is that zoos are there for financial reasons whereby private keepers have only the animals best interests at heart and do not gain any finance to look after their animals.

kirk


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Very valid point Kirk, well said.

It is said at times, and you may be familiar with this, that in fact due to the lack of restrictions upon the budget of the private keeper, the latter in fact make for the better administrators of their animals.

Unlike Zoos, whom are constantly under the firing line of regulative administrative cuts.

R


----------



## Art_Gecko101 (May 6, 2006)

> t is said at times, and you may be familiar with this, that in fact due to the lack of restrictions upon the budget of the private keeper, the latter in fact make for the better administrators of their animals.
> 
> Unlike Zoos, whom are constantly under the firing line of regulative administrative cuts.


Whilst that may be true in one sense, in another completely the opposite is true. With a Zoo, the financial backing to maintain the animals they keep is more or less a constant, and if the 'admins' decide to move the zoos money in another direction (although primates are always popular attractions in zoos so thats more unlikely than for less popular species) then the zoo will have the contacts and motivation to move the individuals on to more suitable establishments.

However the personal keepers financial situation, regardless of what species is being kept, is subject to much more sudden change which, when you have expensive, needy animals to maintain can really leave you up the creek!! How many ads are there in the classifieds every week saying along the lines of 'change in circumstances and i need the money' and most of those animals being sold cost a fraction of that of a primate. So i'm just saying the point about finances being more constant for private keepers isnt really true.

The other issue with changable finances is that private keepers, who, if they have gone to the trouble of researching and keeping the animal properly in the 1st place will no doubt be extremely devoted and attached to their primates, and this attachment often, unfortunately, leads to the owner not being able to sell the animal if their circumstances change, and do whats best for the animal. whereas a zoo would be forced too, whether its keeper was upset or not!

What my point is, is that no matter how noble the private primate keepers initial intentions and how well they set up their animals, the changable nature of human circumstances means that it can be very difficult to maintain such an expensive animal for its whole life, when its lifespan is so long!


----------



## Paradoxurus (Jan 10, 2008)

One of the problems that zoos have with private keepers is that no serious effort is made to maintain self sustaining populations of any particular species. There is very little, if any, cooperation to make best use of viable bloodlines. The buying and selling side of things is all-pervasive unfortunately. 

Can you think of one single example amongst private keepers of a species where individuals are exchanged or co ordinated to best maintain a strong bloodline? It certainly occurs amongst domestic pedigrees but with wild species it is unheard of. I can think of a mere handful of cases where private keepers maintain studbook registered animals and this is only on the strict proviso that they fully cooperate with the administrators of the zoo populations (who, lets face it, are not biased by financial gain and have only the fitness of the species as a whole to influence their decisions). When you acquire any non-studbook species in the private sector (which is inevitably the case) it could effectively have come from anywhere, be related to virtually any degree, to any or none of the others in the population. Beyond a couple of generations, bloodline histories are are virtually unknown.

This is something I have had personal experience with. Banging one's head against a brick wall is as effective as trying to inaugurate selfless cooperation within the private sector.

There is very little altruistism amongst private keepers and rare are those who would even consider donating one of their prized animals to another for the good of the future of the species in captivity. Individuals are too importatant to individuals and no one really gives a damn about the long-term futures of any captive populations.

Perhaps the TSKA has role to play in changing this attitude or has the potential to bring some kind of regiment to the preservation of certain species in captivity in private hands? It is something that that zoos realised decades ago. Perhaps with so many threats to the hobby, now is the time that private keepers did too.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Hi Paradoxus, hope life bodes well for you?

I am under the impression from those that l am in communications with on a fairly regular basis that a liasion is to be had at some future point, which all going well will open up a pathway between the private keeper and the 'zoo - game park' etc.

Now you and l both know that a certain level of this 'pathway' exists already to what the latter class as 'specialist keepers' and arrangements have been made in the past.

The zoo's etc, perhaps rightly so believe that in fact the majority of the private keepers are in it - not so much for the benefit of expanding their collective base - but many say they are in it for the money.

A long time ago in todays' terms, but in many respects not that long ago - 2001 - 2003 private keepers were well known for breeding loans to both fellow private keepers and 'zoos' not all these bade that well and as a result, one does not hear that much about them now, seeing as a good majority went horrribly wrong. And as a practice is more or less frowned upon now by the private keeper.

The private keeper now views the zoo + establishments with a certain amount of caution.

Whilst l can see the benefits of having a much better communications and exchange of 'knowledge and blood line' l at times have also viewed the zoo industry with some scepticism recently .....

Again my friend, you and l know that what you suggest in the final paragraph of your post would be ideal, however it is not readily achievable in todays private exotics market ....... is it?

And no, l am not being negative, sadly realistic.

Rory


----------



## Paradoxurus (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanks for your interest Rory. My career continues to place me between the two factions. Ever changing.

I do hope that a more formal relationship between private keepers and public collections can be instigated as it would be of benefit to both parties. As it stands those zoos that choose to supply animals to private keepers see it largely as a way of getting rid of burdensome, non-viable stock without risking bad publicity that the euthanasia option could pose (there has been some good examples in the media over the past year of this). But surely private keepers can take on more responsibilty than that of 'retired' animals. Unfortunately they, as a whole, have done nothing to prove it so far - there has to be one common goal and not 'every man for himself'. 

Squabbling in public, as occurs on this forum almost daily, does nothing to improve their image. Unless things can radically change then zoos will continue to regard private keepers as a dumping ground, at best, and something to be distanced from at worst.

The private keeper that 'gets-in' with the zoo comunity is a rare beast indeed and historically such 'specialist keepers' have long-established links with particular collections. On the whole, such keepers keep themselves, whether by incident or design, distant from the rest of the private keeping community. It would be easy to arrive at the conclusion that such lack of proximity to fellow private keepers helps to cement their relationship with public ones - emphasising further the disdain with which one party holds the other.

Someone needs to instigate some kind of union, first of all between private keepers and turn around what is, in effect, chaotic management of populations. Only then can a serious attempt be made towards gaining the acceptance of the zoo world.

Learning not to view individual animals as 'property' but as part of a captive-wide population is a good start. This is a view already accepted by those keepers who are 'on the inside'. Lets face it, in the current climate, capture of wild animals is not going to last forever and unless private keepers can get their act together and cooperate, then they will spell the death of their own hobby regardless of any laws that might pose a threat.

Quite frankly, if private keepers misappropriate animals trusted unto them then why should zoos continue that supply? At least if kept within the zoo community individuals can be put to optimum use and not alowed to peeter out through irresponsible or uncontroled pairings. 

I don't think zoos are whiter than white. Far from it in fact. But I do think they've got the concept of managing populations right. Their decision to block out private keepers is a strategic one. From one aspect it enables a coordinator to keep tight control on a population. From another, it serves to maintain their righteousness by disallowing themselves to be tarred by the bad publicity of malpractise within the private sector.

The use of the term 'exotics market' is, sadly, quite pertinant to the whole issue. Unless we can shed any financial influences, the whole concept of co-operation amongst keepers can never be realised.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

*".......... what can a zoo or game park give a primate more than what i can give them......"* 



this...


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

I have a pair of Common Marmosets. They had a baby on Easter Monday. I maintain these little primates to the best of my ability. They are happy healthy monkeys & I love them to bits.


----------



## Betty (Jan 2, 2008)

You quoted as saying "This should be made a punishable offence", Well It is see the 2007 animal welfare act on Defra website.


----------



## Buriram (Jul 17, 2006)

*Viper & Vine*



brittone05 said:


> I would love to see more people saying "yes I keep primates and I keep them damn well" but this is not the case at present.


Hey blue - I keep primates and I keep them damn well! - unfortunately they usually come from people who don't keep them damn well, that said, I know a lot of primate keepers who do a good job and have enclosures that surpass zoo enclosures.

I know a Dutch guy up in Udon Thai (NE Thailand) with a give or take 20 acre enclosure that he actually fenced himself with some of the villagers where he keeps Macaques - usually retired / rescued working monkeys.


----------

