pets thread ...

[drifter]

when considering the topic of human rights people often think of issues like gender equality, fair access for humans to all resources, health care for all, racial equality, non-exploitation of humans, and fair and kind treatment for all people.
i don't recall ever hearing or reading about animal welfare being included in the issue of "human" rights. Why am I bringing this topic up? When you think about it, the way we treat animals has a lot to do with the way we treat each other.
It has been discovered that children who torment and mistreat animals often grow up to abuse humans. individuals who are violent to their family members are often cruel to their pets and use the threat of violence against the family pets as a way to coerce the abused. people who hoard animals are now known to suffer from mental illness and may impact society in a negative way. The inability to be empathetic to animals is often a sign of someone who is unable to have positive feelings for other people and may even be signs of someone with sociopathic tendencies. we, as humans, should be very concerned with how we treat animals and view this as part of our concern for humanity.

the ability of people to treat all animals with kindness and be concerned with the way animals are treated can be a vital lesson in how to be connected with others. when we feel true connection to others we are less likely to cause harm to them. depersonalization and stereotyping has been proven to help people behave in a criminal manner. if we empathize with others it becomes harder to hurt them. there are many people who start the process of empathy by feeling connected to a beloved pet.
children in particular can be taught kindness, caring, and compassion by sharing their lives with a pet. many advocates for animal welfare trace their passion back to a childhood companion. some also remember family values that emphasized the welfare of this animal. positive pet ownership encourages healthier human relationships, a feeling of connection to the natural world, and respect. on the other hand children who are raised isolated from non-human animals can grow up to lack any empathy or caring for any animal besides humans. sometimes this lack of caring extends to all of the natural world and has been come to be called "nature deficit disorder".


kindness to animals is a positive asset to humans. sadly the animal rights movement has confused positive human/animal relationships and animal welfare with animal abuse. it is important to realize that there is a difference between animal "welfare" and animal "rights". the founders and leaders of the animal "rights" movement see human/animal relationships as ultimately detrimental to animals.


they would like all animals to be wild and free, for people to quit eating meat, and stop owning pets. considering the growth of human population, pressures on the natural world, and indicators that people who do not have good relationships with animals can have very real problems, I am puzzled by the animal "rights" agenda. animal "welfare" is the very concern for treating animals kindly, with respect, and seeing that animal needs and care are being met.

I am a pet owner and a wildlife breeder . one of the types of pets I personally own are cats. . my family love animals and nature and share a respect for all life. they treat other people well. I believe this behavior to be directly related to their having grown up with pets and having me demonstrate caring and good treatment of all animals.

Over the years I have had visitors in my home and shop that have marveled at the personalities of my pets, especially my felines and woldlife . People who have not been raised with cats in the home have many strange ideas about what a cat's personality is like. I have heard comments like, "Wow, I didn't know cats could be so friendly", and "I didn't know that cats had so much personality". Dog lovers are especially surprised. Of course, people who are totally unfamiliar with living with animals are amazed at all of my pets.

I have Bengal and Savannah cats and I have encountered more than one visitor who has never seen such a creature. I've been asked, "Is that a wild animal?" and "Does it bite?" when they see how friendly these cats are and their curiosity is satisfied they are always impressed. to me these folks show their unfamiliarity with the natural world and the concepts of domestic vs. wild. What this also demonstrates is that pets can help people connect. when they meet an animal ambassador they can feel a connection and positive feelings for another creature which is related to their feelings of connection to humans.

when issues are viewed as human rights a different 'more important to people' emphasis is usually given to the particular issue being examined. With the correlations between a human's ability to be kind to, care about, and be concerned with the welfare of animals and the same ability applied to humans, one might see the importance of including positive human/animal relationships within the umbrella of human rights. This makes animal welfare a human rights concern.

 

[drifter]

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/m5M6bE6iA-w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Cranial Blowout]

by your logic ...we should ban birds and fishes too ...they belongs to the wild !!! i have been in animal trade for more then 15years ...do you think all the fishes and birds are captive breed ? even if they are captive breed , they need to be collected from the wild for breeding ..isnt it ? dont just believe those bullshit animal activist ...do your own research .

for your information , all fish shops selling marine fishes are collected from the ocean , yes ..you have heard it correctly ...all . by the way , who said animals dont breed well in captivity ? i have been breeding wildlife for ages ....i have not come across any animal that dont breed under my care ....

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6S9ecXWCBCc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

All animals birds and fish have natural instincts and emotions.
I am saddened that so many animals are abused and tortured. The question is, is it morally right to breed animals for monetary gain?
It is cruel and moronic to cage birds or any animal. I cannot imagine any pleasure in seeing a bird in a confined space, out of its mind and masturpating on its perch.
Don't you ever consider that the animals you breed are saying... Release Me... Help Me. Well, I have news for you; they are.
I hope that your 15 years of breeding wild animals doesn't bite you in the arse in another life.

 

[drifter]

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6S9ecXWCBCc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

All animals birds and fish have natural instincts and emotions.
I am saddened that so many animals are abused and tortured. The question is, is it morally right to breed animals for monetary gain?
It is cruel and moronic to cage birds or any animal. I cannot imagine any pleasure in seeing a bird in a confined space, out of its mind and masturpating on its perch.
Don't you ever consider that the animals you breed are saying... Release Me... Help Me. Well, I have news for you; they are.
I hope that your 15 years of breeding wild animals doesn't bite you in the arse in another life.

this thread is about what kind of pet do you keep ..and not how animals are abused and tortured ..by the way , driving car also can cause accidents ...can we ban driving car ? your mentality is like singapore goverment ...just chose the easy way out ...just ban it...like chewing gum .

there is a fine line between selling animals for money and animal exploitation , yes i sell animals for $ but i never feel i exploitat them ...we really love our animals and we are not ashame making money but we never harm the animals . we believe that conservation through capitve propagation . which means we take the pressure off the wildife in order to prove that these beautiful capitive breed animals can make wonderful pet and even investment .So what is exploitation?
raising and slaughtering of livestock for consumption, hunting, using animals for medical or veterinary research, zoos, circuses, animal shows horse racing, & performing animals are all considered exploitation.

years of brainwashing from the goverment will do you no good ...

 

[Cranial Blowout]

Mr. Drifter, I dont mean to harp on - You may like to read this from PETA

Animal Rights Uncompromised: There's No Such Thing as a 'Responsible Breeder'

Many people know to avoid puppy mills and "backyard" breeders. But many kind individuals fall prey to the picket-fence appeal of so-called "responsible" breeders and fail to recognize that no matter how kindly a breeder treats his or her animals, as long as dogs and cats are dying in animal shelters and pounds because of a lack of homes, no breeding can be considered "responsible."

All breeders fuel the animal overpopulation crisis, and every time someone purchases a puppy or a kitten instead of adopting from an animal shelter, homeless animals lose their chance of finding a home—and will be euthanized. Many breeders don't require every puppy or kitten to be spayed or neutered prior to purchase, so the animals they sell can soon have litters of their own, creating even more animals to fill homes that could have gone to animals from shelters—or who will end up in animal shelters or so-called "no-kill" animal warehouses themselves.

Simply put, for every puppy or kitten who is deliberately produced by any breeder, an animal in an animal shelter dies. Producing animals for sale is a greedy and callous business in a world in which there is a critical and chronic shortage of good homes for dogs, cats, and other animals, and the only "responsible breeders" are those who, upon learning about how they contribute to the overpopulation crisis, spay or neuter their animals and get out of the business altogether.

Breeding Trouble

Producing more animals—either to make money or to obtain a certain "look" or characteristic—is also harmful to the animals who are produced by breeding. Dogs and cats don't care whether their physical appearance conforms to a judge's standards, yet they are the ones who suffer the consequences of humans' manipulation. Inbreeding causes painful and life-threatening genetic defects in "purebred" dogs and cats, including crippling hip dysplasia, blindness, deafness, heart defects, skin problems, and epilepsy. Distorting animals for specific physical features also causes severe health problems. The short, pushed-up noses of bulldogs and pugs, for example, can make exercise and even normal breathing difficult for these animals. Dachshunds' long spinal columns often cause back problems, including disc disease.

Adoption: The Only Compassionate Option

There is no excuse for breeding animals or for supporting breeders. If you love animals and are ready to care for a cat or a dog for the rest of the animal's life, please adopt from your local animal shelter, where there are dogs and cats galore—tails wagging and hearts filled with hope, looking out through the cage bars, just waiting to find someone to love. Shelters receive new animals every day, so if you don't find the perfect companion to match your lifestyle on your first visit, keep checking back. When you find your new animal companion, you'll be glad that you chose to save a life—and made a new best friend as well.

If you know anyone who is considering purchasing an animal instead of adopting from an animal shelter, please share this article with them, and please consider making a donation today to support PETA's vital work to save lives.

 

[drifter]

Mr. Drifter, I dont mean to harp on - You may like to read this from PETA

Animal Rights Uncompromised: There's No Such Thing as a 'Responsible Breeder'

Many people know to avoid puppy mills and "backyard" breeders. But many kind individuals fall prey to the picket-fence appeal of so-called "responsible" breeders and fail to recognize that no matter how kindly a breeder treats his or her animals, as long as dogs and cats are dying in animal shelters and pounds because of a lack of homes, no breeding can be considered "responsible."

All breeders fuel the animal overpopulation crisis, and every time someone purchases a puppy or a kitten instead of adopting from an animal shelter, homeless animals lose their chance of finding a home—and will be euthanized. Many breeders don't require every puppy or kitten to be spayed or neutered prior to purchase, so the animals they sell can soon have litters of their own, creating even more animals to fill homes that could have gone to animals from shelters—or who will end up in animal shelters or so-called "no-kill" animal warehouses themselves.

Simply put, for every puppy or kitten who is deliberately produced by any breeder, an animal in an animal shelter dies. Producing animals for sale is a greedy and callous business in a world in which there is a critical and chronic shortage of good homes for dogs, cats, and other animals, and the only "responsible breeders" are those who, upon learning about how they contribute to the overpopulation crisis, spay or neuter their animals and get out of the business altogether.

Breeding Trouble

Producing more animals—either to make money or to obtain a certain "look" or characteristic—is also harmful to the animals who are produced by breeding. Dogs and cats don't care whether their physical appearance conforms to a judge's standards, yet they are the ones who suffer the consequences of humans' manipulation. Inbreeding causes painful and life-threatening genetic defects in "purebred" dogs and cats, including crippling hip dysplasia, blindness, deafness, heart defects, skin problems, and epilepsy. Distorting animals for specific physical features also causes severe health problems. The short, pushed-up noses of bulldogs and pugs, for example, can make exercise and even normal breathing difficult for these animals. Dachshunds' long spinal columns often cause back problems, including disc disease.

Adoption: The Only Compassionate Option

There is no excuse for breeding animals or for supporting breeders. If you love animals and are ready to care for a cat or a dog for the rest of the animal's life, please adopt from your local animal shelter, where there are dogs and cats galore—tails wagging and hearts filled with hope, looking out through the cage bars, just waiting to find someone to love. Shelters receive new animals every day, so if you don't find the perfect companion to match your lifestyle on your first visit, keep checking back. When you find your new animal companion, you'll be glad that you chose to save a life—and made a new best friend as well.

If you know anyone who is considering purchasing an animal instead of adopting from an animal shelter, please share this article with them, and please consider making a donation today to support PETA's vital work to save lives.

first of all i think you should read more about PETA'S before praising them ...

animal lovers worldwide now have access to more than a decade's worth of evidence showing that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) kills thousands of defenseless pets at its Virginia headquarters. since 1998, PETA has opted to "put down" 25,840 adoptable dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens instead of finding them "forever homes."

PETA's "Animal Record" report for 2010, which the animal rights group itself filed with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, shows that PETA employees killed 94 percent of the dogs and cats in their care last year. during all of 2010, PETA found adoptive homes for just 44 pets.

just 44 dogs and cats—out of the 2,345 PETA took in. those numbers are abysmal, and they and offer little hope for homeless animals to escape perishing on PETA's version of "death row."

the Virginia Beach SPCA, just down the road from PETA's Norfolk headquarters, manages to adopt out the vast majority of the animals in its care. and it does it on a shoestring budget

why would PETA, an "animal rights" group, secretly kill animals at its headquarters? from a cost-saving standpoint, PETA's hypocrisy isn't difficult to understand: Killing adoptable cats and dogs—and storing the bodies in a walk-in freezer until they can be cremated—requires far less money and effort than caring for the pets until they are adopted.

PETA has a $33 million annual budget. But instead of investing in the lives of the thousands of flesh-and-blood creatures in its care, the group spends millions on media campaigns telling Americans that eating meat, drinking milk, fishing, hunting, wearing leather shoes, and benefiting from medical research performed on lab rats are all "unethical."

the bottom line is that PETA's leaders care more about cutting into their advertising budget than finding homes for the six pets, on average, that they kill every single day.

years of public outrage has not been enough to convince PETA to eliminate its pet eradication program. now the death toll of animals in PETA's care has reached 25,840, including 2,200 pets in 2010 alone.

PETA has ceased being an animal charity. It's behaving more like a slaughterhouse.

 

[drifter]

seven things you didnt know about PETA

1) According to government documents, PETA employees have killed more than 19,200 dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens since 1998. This behavior continues despite PETA’s moralizing about the “unethical” treatment of animals by farmers, scientists, restaurant owners, circuses, hunters, fishermen, zookeepers, and countless other Americans. PETA puts to death over 90 percent of the animals it accepts from members of the public who expect the group to make a reasonable attempt to find them adoptive homes. PETA holds absolutely no open-adoption shelter hours at its Norfolk, VA headquarters, choosing instead to spend part of its $32 million annual income on a contract with a crematory service to periodically empty hundreds of animal bodies from its large walk-in freezer.

2) PETA president and co-founder Ingrid Newkirk has described her group’s overall goal as “total animal liberation.” This means the complete abolition of meat, milk, cheese, eggs, honey, zoos, aquariums, circuses, wool, leather, fur, silk, hunting, fishing, and pet ownership. In a 2003 profile of Newkirk in The New Yorker, author Michael Specter wrote that Newkirk has had at least one seeing-eye dog taken away from its blind owner. PETA is also against all medical research that requires the use of animals, including research aimed at curing AIDS and cancer.

3) PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

4) PETA activists regularly target children as young as six years old with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda, even waiting outside their schools to intercept them without notifying their parents. One piece of kid-targeted PETA literature tells small children: “Your Mommy Kills Animals!” PETA brags that its messages reach over 1.2 million minor children, including 30,000 kids between the ages of 6 and 12, all contacted by e-mail without parental supervision. One PETA vice president told the Fox News Channel’s audience: “Our campaigns are always geared towards children, and they always will be.”

5) PETA’s president has said that “even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we would be against it.” And PETA has repeatedly attacked research foundations like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, solely because they support animal-based research aimed at curing life-threatening diseases and birth defects. And PETA helped to start and manage a quasi-medical front group, the misnamed Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, to attack medical research head-on.

6) PETA has compared Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust to farm animals and Jesus Christ to pigs. PETA’s religious campaigns include a website that claims—despite ample evidence to the contrary—that Jesus Christ was a vegetarian. PETA holds protests at houses of worship, even suing one church that tried to protect its members from Sunday-morning harassment. Its billboards taunt Christians with the message that hogs “died for their sins.” PETA insists, contrary to centuries of rabbinical teaching, that the Jewish ritual of kosher slaughter shouldn’t be allowed. And its infamous “Holocaust on Your Plate” campaign crassly compared the Jewish victims of Nazi genocide to farm animals.

7) PETA frequently looks the other way when its celebrity spokespersons don’t practice what it preaches. As gossip bloggers and Hollywood journalists have noted, Pamela Anderson’s Dodge Viper (auctioned to benefit PETA) had a “luxurious leather interior”; Jenna Jameson was photographed fishing, slurping oysters, and wearing a leather jacket just weeks after launching an anti-leather campaign for PETA; Morrissey got an official “okay” from PETA after eating at a steakhouse; Dita von Teese has written about her love of furs and foie gras; Steve-O built a career out of abusing small animals on film; the officially “anti-fur” Eva Mendes often wears fur anyway; and Charlize Theron’s celebrated October 2007 Vogue cover shoot featured several suede garments. In 2008, “Baby Phat” designer Kimora Lee Simmons became a PETA spokesmodel despite working with fur and leather, after making a $20,000 donation to the animal rights group.

 

[drifter]

ppl should do more research about those so called animal welfare group ..before they blindly agreed what they said ...

 

[drifter]

the big problem with exotic animal sanctuaries or scamtuaries is not only the type of expensive exotic animals being bought, it is also the huge sums of money some sanctuaries are asking in order to accept new ‘non exciting’ animals.

recently a certain sanctuary wanted the public to give them 250,000 dollars, YES, quarter of a million, in order for them to take in 4 cougars in the future. few month later the same ‘sanctuary’ asked the same amount for one juvenile black bear.

that is obscene and greedy; economy is bad and humans are losing their houses. many captive or wild animals can be helped with that kind of money, and the animals truly don’t care how aesthetically pleasing to humans their sleeping den is.

gorgeous human homes sell for that amount of money! in some cases, the sanctuary truly builds nicer cages. Regrettably, more often than not, the money just goes to personally enrich the sanctuary owners.

a few years ago 3 illegal tigers were discovered in Nebraska. Another ‘sanctuary’ agreed to take them IF they got 150,000 dollars upfront for caging. this place started media and Internet fundraising, ‘supposedly’ for these tigers. i contacted the Nebraska state wildlife department. The wildlife agents were confident the issue was solved, and that the tigers were going to this particular “sanctuary”. 1 assured them I knew this place, and advised them to keep their options open and have a backup plan, and not to put too much trust into this particular place.

1 was right, the tigers ended up going to different sanctuaries, and the greedy place kept the money they raised anyway. in addition, this facility got themselves few extremely rare NON RESCUED baby exotic cats instead.
what kind of message did this unethical sanctuary send to the Nebraska wildlife agents? That the exotic animal community, sanctuaries in particular, can’t be trusted?

in another case, a ‘sanctuary’ bought a very expensive exotic animal for $75,000, to be remitted in multiple payments. toward the end, the checks started to bounce, so the breeder took the sanctuary to court and won. the scamtuary eventually paid the breeder the money owed to get their personal pet back, but both sides had to pay attorney’s fees. the scammed breeder was never refunded the court fees, and I wonder how donors like their money being spent on expensive pets and attorneys’ fees, instead on truly needy animals. the breeders too need to get more responsible and STOP selling their animals to scamtuaries.

n recent years few well known hypocritical sanctuaries imported big cats from South America and Mexico. If USA truly has such a big problem with homeless exotic cats, why not rescue the ones that are already here, why the need to import the ‘rescues’ huge costs?

Some sanctuaries also are very fast to ‘rescue’ cubs or the small cat species (smaller than cougars), which are in short supply. they are more valuable and can easily be re-homed to a self supporting non-sanctuary environment. the explanation (excuse) I was given was that wildlife agents would not place a confiscated illegal pet in a non-commercial ‘pet’ home, or even a commercial exotic non-rescue place.

the previous owners are still very involved in her life, and if they ever get legal, they can get their exotic pet back, as I truly believe the exotic cats do best with whoever raised them. i was worried that if this bobcat went to a hypocritical sanctuary, the owners would never get a chance to get it back, and they probably would be asked not to visit it as it would be ‘supposedly’ too confusing for the animal. also the sanctuary would be likely fabricating stories about how the owners supposedly didn’t take care of the animal properly and abused it, and that these animals make bad pets.

too many sanctuaries are very quick to do extra media circus getting animals from highly publicized cases, and are asking huge amounts of money for caging. why not just help the current owner to improve the husbandry, and get legal? why the need to be greedy and grabby media whores?

in some cases, the sanctuaries keep the animals alive too long instead of ending their suffering. in one case, 25-year-old tiger was put thru invasive cancer surgeries, instead of being euthanized long time ago. in other case, a lame exotic sheep or goat had a 4-wheeled contraption built around its body so it could ‘walk’. In all cases, these extreme cases bring lots of media and donations, as well as suffering to the animals that should have been humanely euthanized long time ago. instead these poor animals are being abused and exploited as a fundraising media tool.

It is one thing if these animals are pets and you are spending your own money. it is completely different when donor’s money earmarked for possible true honest rescue, or conservation, are used on frivolous surgeries and contraptions that often just add to the animals’’ suffering.

sometimes euthanasia is better than keeping suffering animals alive in pain or in unnatural or cramped conditions.

 

[drifter]

even ACRES so called non-profit organisation in singapore is doing some backyard trading of confiscated animals ..and puting public donation into their pocket . which i dont think those animals lover out there know ...

 

[sohaltang]

hi bro, how? the gecko? any email to contact you? pm me pls

 

[singveld]

 

[singveld]

 

[singveld]

 

[singveld]

 

[singveld]