# Tarantula vs. Mouse Video - Compfused



## becca81 (Jun 8, 2005)

I'm not going to let myself get started on how dangerous this was for the spider and how people disregard the safety of a 5" spider for their own personal entertainment...

Good quality video nonetheless...

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/797/


----------



## Randolph XX() (Jun 8, 2005)

ya, i've found it few hours earlier
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=39029&page=3
however, spiders do have the ability to take down small rodents in the wild


----------



## becca81 (Jun 8, 2005)

Aha!  Sorry, I looked around to see if it was already here and didn't think to check the video thread.    

Yes, they *can* take down small rodents, but there is more risk involved than in taking down a grasshopper...


----------



## Randolph XX() (Jun 8, 2005)

i don't think so becca
invertenrate preys tend to struggling till they're all meshed up
and mice or other vertebrates won't stroggle more than a minute
my last experience of feeding a mouse to 8"L.parahybana showed that the lill thing had struggled only 3 sec!
also grass hopper and crix got spiny rear legs , which could be more dangerous


----------



## Morbus ascendit (Jun 8, 2005)

Hi!

Don't know whether or not this is my problem only but there's no audio in that video. The same video containing some "eeeks" can be seen here (requires Quicktime): http://www.erbfeind.com/spider/! Pictures of the mouse before and after the event.

Regards,
Uwe


----------



## mimic58 (Jun 8, 2005)

becca81 said:
			
		

> I'm not going to let myself get started on how dangerous this was for the spider and how people disregard the safety of a 5" spider for their own personal entertainment...
> 
> Good quality video nonetheless...
> 
> http://www.compfused.com/directlink/797/


Kool well found becca , Dangerous for the spider? Btw I think its alot more dangerouse for the mouse  

Post watching: Ok perhaps maybe that mouse was a bit big for that T but i think again this still kinda reinforces what im saying If it can eat a mouse that big it can sure as hell manage a small one , But i do agree that was a risk way to large


----------



## becca81 (Jun 8, 2005)

Randolph XX() said:
			
		

> my last experience of feeding a mouse to 8"L.parahybana showed that the lill thing had struggled only 3 sec!
> also grass hopper and crix got spiny rear legs , which could be more dangerous


Please don't tell me that you really think a cricket is more dangerous than a mouse.  I'd much rather be bitten by a cricket than a mouse!  There's lots of variables involved, but one of the biggest ones is the presence of *teeth*!

How long any prey struggles can depend on where there spider strikes it.  Mice are larger, stronger prey.  They put up more resistence and can defend themselves better than small invertebrates (such as crickets) can.  I'm not against feeding rodents to tarantulas, I don't really care one way or the other.  However, I see no need to put the spider at risk.  I've seen pictures of and spiders in person that are missing whole and parts of legs due to someone feeding them a full grown mouse.


----------



## Randolph XX() (Jun 8, 2005)

well, mine always go for the throat, the mouse would'nt have a chance to bite
well, you are not taking down the prey urself, right?
for bigger prey, spiders go for the core part of the body, and they can always tell 
it's natural instinct to hunt mouse, and as far as they are terrestrial, they have lottta rodent encounters in their sizes,and i do believe a LARGE locust with strong rear legs are more dangerous than a mouse


----------



## becca81 (Jun 8, 2005)

Randolph XX() said:
			
		

> well, mine always go for the throat, the mouse would'nt have a chance to bite
> well, you are not taking down the prey urself, right?
> for bigger prey, spiders go for the core part of the body, and they can always tell
> it's natural instinct to hunt mouse, and as far as they are terrestrial, they have lottta rodent encounters in their sizes,and i do believe a LARGE locust with strong rear legs are more dangerous than a mouse


Natural instinct is survival.  In the wild, tarantulas are going to eat what they have access to.  Most reports from the wild state that they typically eat small invertebrates and will also occassionally eat small rodents and/or birds.  The spider is going to defend itself against anything that it has to, just like any other organism.  

The mouse in the video is as big as the tarantula!  A pinkie, sure.  There's no risk.  Oh, but wait, a pinkie wouldn't be _nearly_ as fun to watch.    

My main point regarding the video is that:

A.)  It isn't necessary.  A ~5" _G. rosea_ does not *need* a full-grown mouse as part of its diet.

B.)  It is putting the spider at unneccessary risk to give it prey that is as big as it is and equipped with teeth.


----------



## mimic58 (Jun 8, 2005)

OMG that was a Rose  I take back everything i said There Dam lucky that mouse didnt eat there tarantula lol


----------



## DR zuum (Jun 8, 2005)

I was trying to find a study i read about 3 yrs ago,on how sensitive rodents were to tarantula venom,and it seemed to be geared for killing rodents,but was unable to locate it maybe someone else here has a link to it or a copy.Rodents and tarantulas are enemies in the wild i've watched deer mice here get taken out by the local Aphonopelma sp.

So its not like its a unfair position or anything for the T.Me i feed mice sometimes,very rarely as it seems to agitate the other T's in the room.But i always kill them beforehand,but i've also got rarer species strictly for breeding so i dont want any accidents.But some people's views are different but i dont think it should be condemned as it goes down like that in the wild.If you notice there was not much of a struggle it was over very quickly i counted 5 seconds until it was under control 10 seconds total for only twitchy movement,very clean kill.Out by roger springs a natural hot spring here you will find mice bolus sometimes along with other insect remains by quite a few burrows,its overrun with grasses and plants numerous food sources there but mice are still taken.


----------



## ink_scorpion (Jun 8, 2005)

IMO, very risky! My Ts will ONLY EVER get F/T rodents, PERIOD! I side with Becca


----------



## Blasphemy (Jun 8, 2005)

So what's next....7" T. blondi vs adult rat?


----------



## shogun804 (Jun 8, 2005)

well the spider did look kind of small for that mouse but we all tend to over react in such instances lets face it how long have T's been around :? , and we treat them like they are babies, they are natural born killers. spiders in the wild do not have the luxury of taking down what ever prey they feel is safe, they attack, kill, then eat becasue who knows were their next meal is coming from, i mean there are pics of T's in the wild eating bats :?  of course you always have people saying why take the risk.....well the answer is simple becasue they want too.  im done critisizing people for how they feed their animals or inverts it is their money, their time and their problem, if something happens.


----------



## mimic58 (Jun 8, 2005)

Blasphemy said:
			
		

> So what's next....7" T. blondi vs adult rat?


Adult C.crawshayi could mess up a Rat, not that a blondie couldnt but i have seen pics of King baboons with Whole adult rats, but as yet never a video  :wall:


----------



## Ravienne (Jun 8, 2005)

Morbus ascendit said:
			
		

> Hi!
> 
> Don't know whether or not this is my problem only but there's no audio in that video. The same video containing some "eeeks" can be seen here (requires Quicktime): http://www.erbfeind.com/spider/!


Uwe, thanks for posting that Quicktime link.  My computer doesn't really like RealPlayer.

In reference to the debate at hand, it's true that the spider and any damage incurred was totally that person's business.  I can't tell them how to treat their property.  But I would certainly never do it, and I don't really understand why anyone would apart from juvenile thrill-seeking.  True, these spiders are highly evolved killing machines, but they're still fragile.  The rosie was able to take the mouse down, but she was only a good scratch to the abdomen away from disaster.  

When the video started, I expected some hulking _T. blondi_ or _L. parahybana_ to come leaping out.  But when that girl scurried through the hole in the coconut, I almost felt sorry for her.  Having to literally fight for her life in captivity?  Poor thing.  She won, but what about next time?

Please remember that I'm a newbie, both to this forum and to tarantulas in general.  This is all my opinion, based on reading and a little bit of very past experience.

Cheers!
-ravienne


----------



## becca81 (Jun 8, 2005)

Ravienne said:
			
		

> When the video started, I expected some hulking _T. blondi_ or _L. parahybana_ to come leaping out.  But when that girl scurried through the hole in the coconut, I almost felt sorry for her.  Having to literally fight for her life in captivity?  Poor thing.  She won, but what about next time?
> 
> Please remember that I'm a newbie, both to this forum and to tarantulas in general.  This is all my opinion, based on reading and a little bit of very past experience.


Welcome to the forum and the hobby.  Even though we sometimes disagree, everyone has the right to their opinion, so don't be afraid to share yours.


----------



## ilovebugs (Jun 10, 2005)

wow becca. thats crazy.

I fed my rosie a thawed pinkey once, that was good enough for me, although I would like to see one of mine take down a mouse, I doubt I'll ever do it.

and yea, crickets and grasshoppers are nothing, did you see the way those legs were kicking? I thought it was going to lose a leg from that. not to mention those teeth.


----------



## Beardo (Jun 10, 2005)

That mouse was way too big for that spider IMO. Thats just unnecessary as far as I'm concerned....no reason to put your pet at risk like that.


----------



## Blasphemy (Jun 11, 2005)

Yeah that mouse was really too big for that little rosea IMO...I fed a mouse to one of my past tarantulas, but it was a 7" T. blondi so the size difference wasn't as severe as it is in that video.


----------



## Angelo (Jun 11, 2005)

i found it here: http://gorillamask.net/mousespider.shtml

i was thinking a blondi was gonna pop out...but it was a rosie!!!

i really doubt that keeper is experienced...probably just some kid who bought it for the excitment. o well.


----------



## Big and Hairy (Jun 11, 2005)

I would have to agree that I did feel a little sorry for the spider.  I have decided to play it safe and keep my tarantulas on a diet of crickets and an occasional pinkie for the bigger ones.  However, on occasion I do feed my 6" A. Genic female a young green anole lizard.  These little guys are pretty much harmless to a big tarantula when compared to mice.  Because of their speed and climbing ability, green anoles bring out the true speed in a spider and it can be pretty fun to watch and see which one is faster.  The anole's are smart too, and I've seen it take nearly an hour before the spider finally caught it.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 15, 2005)

*the property game...*



			
				Ravienne said:
			
		

> In reference to the debate at hand, it's true that the spider and any damage incurred was totally that person's business.  I can't tell them how to treat their property.


And that would be true if we were talking about 'property'. But we're not - we're talking about life, which no-one owns. And you should say something when you see life being abused like this. Is abuse too strong a word? it sits with me about as comfortably as the word cruelty does. A spider like that should not have to fight for its life like that against something that has so much potential to harm it. Especially in an environment where it can't flee if it wants to, and even moreso, when its only for the entertainment thing. We all know they do fine on crickets. When will people learn that these animals are NOT here for our damn entertainment.

And while I'm at it - why, please is the sound so important. Why would you want to hear an animal crying for its life as it dies ? I do worry about people sometimes...


----------



## cacoseraph (Jun 15, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> When will people learn that these animals are NOT here for our damn entertainment.


well, why *did* you buy yours?


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 15, 2005)

Why did i buy mine ?

Because I felt I was responsible enough to keep one not only alive, but also happy and content, without severely limiting the instincts it would have in the wild. It was never there to amuse me - sure I get enormous enjoyment and amazement from watching my spiders, but its always on their terms - i am up when they are, and I watch them doing what they do, and that is all. There is no need to 'show them off' to other people, get them out to show people, or to even disturb them unecessarily.

I think it comes down to respect. Do you respect the life you are pledged to protect, or do you view it as something you own, and therefore can play god with ? Personally speaking, I have enough respect for their lives to know that claiming to 'own' them is insanity, but as important, is the respect for the responsibilty to their well being that I have taken on by the relatively selfish gesture of choosing to 'keep' one in the first place. this, perhaps is the one consession I have made. And I'm not entirely guilt-free that I did. But I remain clear - I don't own them - I look after them, and I do it to the absolute best of my ability. Were I to fail them in any way now, through neglect, or not doing enough research, it would be bad enough, but to risk their safety and happiness for my entertainment would be a human tragedy of titanic proportions.


----------



## becca81 (Jun 15, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> Why did i buy mine ?
> 
> It was never there to amuse me - sure I get enormous enjoyment and amazement from watching my spiders, but its always on their terms - i am up when they are, and I watch them doing what they do, and that is all. There is no need to 'show them off' to other people, get them out to show people, or to even disturb them unecessarily.


This is what *most* people mean when they say that they get enjoyment from their spiders.  The people who do stupid things with their Ts are in the minority.

As for showing them to others - who doesn't?  It's partly about teaching others about the hobby and discrediting myths about tarantulas.  I don't get mine out, but I do talk about them and show them (in their tanks) to other people.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 15, 2005)

becca81 said:
			
		

> This is what *most* people mean when they say that they get enjoyment from their spiders.  The people who do stupid things with their Ts are in the minority.
> 
> As for showing them to others - who doesn't?  It's partly about teaching others about the hobby and discrediting myths about tarantulas.  I don't get mine out, but I do talk about them and show them (in their tanks) to other people.


I hope you're right, Becca, I really do. But I find I have to say these things / make these points where other people don't, and I feel its important that _someone_ does. I see a hell of a lot of posts here (not so much on the UK boards, but there too) concerning injuries and cruelty to animals caused by either gross stupidity, or well intentioned lack of research on behalf of the keeper and often, these people lament the death of their animal, everyone on the board pats them on the back and says 'there there, oh dear' etc etc, and no1 even sees fit to point out that the loss could have been avoided, had there been some level of basic respect involved. So when I see these posts, it might as well be me that does actually raise that issue. And that is all. I don't mean to offend anyone, and I agree with you - the points I am making should be obvious to everyone, and hopefully, are to most, but for those for whom this transparently isn't the case, the comments need to be there...

As for watching them, and showing them to people in their cages - of course there's nothing wrong with that - I'm with you 100% that to educate, and introduce others to these amazing animals is a good thing to do - i was referring more to the people that prod them out of, or deprive them of burrows to be on display, shine hot, bright lights on them, move them all the time for photos, feed them dangerous food just to watch the spectacle of the kill - that sort of thing - handling them just to test ones own bravery, or even worse, to exhibit it to others. 

I notice you, too, were moved to say something at the very top of this thread, concerning the spuriousness of feeding prey that big to a rosie. I was just moved to say a bit more


----------



## rastro111 (Jun 15, 2005)

one thing you have to realize is the mouse in this movie is a genetically watered down lab mouse and is completly domesticated.  they have almost no ability to defend themselves when compaired to a wild cousin of equal size.  did you see how it just stood there inches away from the t looking at it.  no defense mechanisms or insticts at all.  while i wouldnt say i advocate feeding a mouse to an equally sized t (and certainly wouldnt try it on my animals) my money would be on the T everytime.  

also i find it disturbing when people think that animals should be held to similar ethical standards as humans.  i dont advocate torture or mistreatment but animals do not have the right to anything especially domesticated ones.


----------



## MizM (Jun 16, 2005)

At the conference, Darrin gave a lecture about feeding strictly invertebrates to T. blondi. Seems their fangs fall out! The cheliceral area has magnesium, and invertebrates have lots of calcium, which interferes with the magnesium.
(PLEASE forgive my shoddy explanation of the phenomenon, but I'm worn OUT!) 

At any rate, mice are definitely a rare treat for my blondi now, she's getting hissers and crix.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 16, 2005)

Ok - I accept that a lab mouse is, to some extent, a different, and less hostile ball game than a wild specimen. But then I read this...



			
				rastro111 said:
			
		

> ...animals do not have the right to anything especially domesticated ones.


Aah. thank you, Rastro - someone demonstrating concisely, and perfectly my previous point about attitude, and lack of respect for life. A person who can say that about animals - that they have no rights, is a perfect example of the kind of keeper I am talking about in my previous posts on this thread.

Yes they do have rights, Rastro. They are alive, which makes them different to stationary objects. That alone would give them the right to a life NOT exploited by us for our own entertainment, in my book, just as you would no doubt award yourself the 'right' not to be exploited by anyone else. The faliure to realize this by certain individuals is perhaps the most worrying thing I have seen on this board. Is it not obvious that if we take something from its home, and move it somewhere else because we want to look after it, for whatever reason - we OWE it to that animal to do it well, and maintain a respect for its life. 

Now without going into some whole other debate, where I'd point out that actually none of us have any rights to anything, and the fact that some of us think we do is a sparkling advertisement for ego's out of control, I shall quietly bow out, and remove myself from a situation I feel it is pointless battlling...

Thank you, to those who did, for listening.

All i was really trying to say was - I think it's great when people look after their spiders well, and I wish the few that don't, would. Now what was provocative about that ?  I shall end my participation in this particular thread by returning strictly to topic, and saying - nicely shot video


----------



## Randolph XX() (Jun 16, 2005)

MizM said:
			
		

> At the conference, Darrin gave a lecture about feeding strictly invertebrates to T. blondi. Seems their fangs fall out! The cheliceral area has magnesium, and invertebrates have lots of calcium, which interferes with the magnesium.
> (PLEASE forgive my shoddy explanation of the phenomenon, but I'm worn OUT!)
> 
> At any rate, mice are definitely a rare treat for my blondi now, she's getting hissers and crix.


that's really interesting. Is that the only case for T.blondi or does it aplly to other Ts?


----------



## FryLock (Jun 16, 2005)

rastro111 said:
			
		

> one thing you have to realize is the mouse in this movie is a genetically watered down lab mouse and is completly domesticated.  they have almost no ability to defend themselves when compaired to a wild cousin of equal size.  did you see how it just stood there inches away from the t looking at it.  no defense mechanisms or insticts at all.


Domesticated rat's and even mice will still turn the tables when they get the chance, most feeder rodent's that have killed or maimed the animals they have been offered to are domesticated farmed for the use as feeders.


----------



## Windchaser (Jun 16, 2005)

Randolph XX() said:
			
		

> that's really interesting. Is that the only case for T.blondi or does it aplly to other Ts?


It was also observed with A. genics. It would be a safe assumption that if this theory is true, that it would apply to most, if not all, other T's.


----------



## Sheri (Jun 16, 2005)

The fangs just fall out? Like out of the blue? One at a time? Or were they losing them within the same general time period?
Are they regenerated with the next molt?
After how many years with strictly invertebrates was this observed?
And in how many specimens?
What about naturally small species, the dwarves, who are unlikely to take larger prey?

I am surprised by this information - especially in relatively short life-spanned species too. 

*Runs to buy pinkies*


----------



## becca81 (Jun 16, 2005)

MizM said:
			
		

> At the conference, Darrin gave a lecture about feeding strictly invertebrates to T. blondi. Seems their fangs fall out! The cheliceral area has magnesium, and invertebrates have lots of calcium, which interferes with the magnesium.
> (PLEASE forgive my shoddy explanation of the phenomenon, but I'm worn OUT!)
> 
> At any rate, mice are definitely a rare treat for my blondi now, she's getting hissers and crix.


Okay - I'm a little confused.  I'd think that _vertebrates_ have lots of calcium, but not invertebrates (hence adding calcium to crickets..).  And you said that you're giving mainly "hissers and crix," so I'm guessing that vertebrates (mice, etc.) are not good for T. blondi?   :?


----------



## Windchaser (Jun 16, 2005)

becca81 said:
			
		

> Okay - I'm a little confused.  I'd think that _vertebrates_ have lots of calcium, but not invertebrates (hence adding calcium to crickets..).  And you said that you're giving mainly "hissers and crix," so I'm guessing that vertebrates (mice, etc.) are not good for T. blondi?   :?


Yes, that was a typo. The problems were observed for tarantulas who had a diet mainly consisting of vertebrates. Pinkies have approximately 15 times the calcium of invertebrate prey items.

Sheri, you don't need to run out to buy pinkies.


----------



## FryLock (Jun 16, 2005)

Im guessing this only applies to T.blondi as I fed a B.albop and a B.smithi for around 9 years on pre killed pinks and fuzzy’s with no invert prey at all the smithi is dead (17 years from sling) but the B.albop’s still going over 10 years now of a pink/fuzzy roughly every 3-6 months.


----------



## Windchaser (Jun 16, 2005)

FryLock said:
			
		

> Im guessing this only applies to T.blondi as I fed a B.albop and a B.smithi for around 9 years on pre killed pinks and fuzzy’s with no invert prey at all the smithi is dead (17 years from sling) but the B.albop’s still going over 10 years now of a pink/fuzzy roughly every 3-6 months.


What you observed could also be something similar to smoking. Smoking has definitely been shown to be detrimental to ones health. However, there are folks out there who smoke like a chimney their entire lives and nothing happens to them. Others end up with a host of health problems. The evidence from two individuals from two different species is hardly proof that too much calcium is not a problem.

It should also be noted that the problems with fangs and calcium is only a theory at the moment.


----------



## jdcarrel (Jun 16, 2005)

I saw this video on another board.  I was pretty suprised when I saw how small the spider was when it came out because of how large the mouse was.


----------



## FryLock (Jun 16, 2005)

That is true but it does seem odd that larger species would be negatively affected by a high amount of vertebrate prey when smaller one’s which would be a lot less lightly to feed on them do not seem to have fang loss/brakeage (at least for me and not always to the extremes of the two brachys it has to be said) I cancelled feeding 5 genic’s on a mouse only diet due to snake needs but they had seemed to do well from a year of age to sub adults 18 months later fed mice only.

Although in the case of many wild Theraphosids there wild vert diet maybe mostly “lighter” foods reptiles/amphibians/birds with less dense bones and less calcium, in which case it may be the over feeding of mice ect that’s the problem.


----------



## tmanjim (Jun 16, 2005)

Personally, I'm With Becca. I Raised Most Of Mt T's From Babies And Am Not Going To Risk Injury If Not Necessary. Fact Is I Hate Crickets And Rather Enjoy Seeing Them Get Taken Downand Chowed.


----------



## MizM (Jun 16, 2005)

Windchaser said:
			
		

> Yes, that was a typo. The problems were observed for tarantulas who had a diet mainly consisting of vertebrates. Pinkies have approximately 15 times the calcium of invertebrate prey items.
> 
> Sheri, you don't need to run out to buy pinkies.



Thanks hon. I was so tired I couldn't have even told you the difference between the two, let alone spell them!  

I'm hoping Christian and all will write something up soon. In the meantime, you can get all the details at the R.I.E.S.M. Yahoo site. Although Windchaser seems to have the facts nailed down pretty well!


----------



## common spider (Jun 17, 2005)

I think its great.I have lots of luck with feeding mice to my T's and they love them.I used a stopwatch to cee how fast the mouse dies and it is right around 1 min.


Mice as food make the T very happy.When I feed my larger T's mice they do the happy dance for almost 2 days.

8)


----------



## Sheri (Jun 17, 2005)

common spider said:
			
		

> I think its great.I have lots of luck with feeding mice to my T's and they love them.I used a stopwatch to cee how fast the mouse dies and it is right around 1 min.
> 
> 
> Mice as food make the T very happy.When I feed my larger T's mice they do the happy dance for almost 2 days.
> ...


Ok, I have fed live pinkies, and live fuzzies to larger T's (blondi) but I take no pleasure in it. It is interesting, from a biological standpoint, and always a stunning display of power of the predator but at the same time the mammal in me screams in horror. Like a car accident, of course, I watch... but there is little doubt to me that there is a segment of the population that feed mice far more often than they have to, to species that do not require it. And in those cases I really have to wonder what the motivation is.

I mean, I love watching nature shows, and all my favorite animals are predatory. I literally jump when the pounce and attack, getting right into it. But I after giving it some thought it is NOT because I want to see something killed, but because the capability and skill of the animal completely blows me away. I think fundamentally, there is a chasm of difference between the two.

Unless I am deluding myself and massaging a sore conscience. That possibility must be admitted if the matter is to be given any critical thought, I suppose.

I mean, to not be impressed by a hunter when you keep them, study them in part because the hunting fascinates you would be hypocritical to say the least. But in terms of a pleasure response analysed - I am not getting off on watching some relatively defenseless animal get slaughtered.

I would seriously consider any association with people in the hobby that did as I can't see that kind of interest as a genuine passion for the creature as part of a larger chain in the animal kingdom which is how we should view it, if we are to promote the hobby in a positive way.

Thoughts?


----------



## MizM (Jun 17, 2005)

Sheri said:
			
		

> Ok, I have fed live pinkies, and live fuzzies to larger T's (blondi) but I take no pleasure in it. It is interesting, from a biological standpoint, and always a stunning display of power of the predator but at the same time the mammal in me screams in horror. Like a car accident, of course, I watch... but there is little doubt to me that there is a segment of the population that feed mice far more often than they have to, to species that do not require it. And in those cases I really have to wonder what the motivation is.
> 
> I mean, I love watching nature shows, and all my favorite animals are predatory. I literally jump when the pounce and attack, getting right into it. But I after giving it some thought it is NOT because I want to see something killed, but because the capability and skill of the animal completely blows me away. I think fundamentally, there is a chasm of difference between the two.
> 
> ...


I agree, completely. When I DO feed vertebrates, I watch long enough to ensure the T gets the poor creature firmly in her fangs. Once I'm comfortable that my T won't be injured, I leave the scene... quickly. As a lover of all creatures, it wrenches my heart to hear the little squeaks of the mice when they are harpooned.

It's a beautiful sight to see a leopard take down a small antelope. The display of strength, speed and intelligence is breathtaking. Yet we don't say "Yeah, rip that baby apart!" She's simply doing what she has to do to survive.

IMHO, anyone who gets off on the carnage of the predatory world really doesn't belong in the hobby. That's NOT what were about.


----------



## Jmadson13 (Jun 17, 2005)

rastro111 said:
			
		

> one thing you have to realize is the mouse in this movie is a genetically watered down lab mouse and is completly domesticated.  they have almost no ability to defend themselves when compaired to a wild cousin of equal size.  did you see how it just stood there inches away from the t looking at it.  no defense mechanisms or insticts at all.  while i wouldnt say i advocate feeding a mouse to an equally sized t (and certainly wouldnt try it on my animals) my money would be on the T everytime.
> 
> also i find it disturbing when people think that animals should be held to similar ethical standards as humans.  i dont advocate torture or mistreatment but animals do not have the right to anything especially domesticated ones.


Genetically watered down or not I've seen some horific bites to snakes that so called watered down rodents were left in with over night. They'll all defend themselves in a fight or flight situation. And a mouse that size could very well kill that spider


----------



## rastro111 (Jun 17, 2005)

Sure and I could very well kill a lion with a sharp stick.  My point is/was it’s not very likely.  If you are willing to take the small risk to observe your animal's behavior go ahead

cerbera, to clarify, what is so provocative about your statements to me is that you believe there is some sort of universal set of 'rights' that animals are entitled too as well as your concept of what rights are.  to me rights are not an abstract idea of entitlement I grant myself, but rather a real set of rules granted by my government (to whom I pay taxes) that are written into laws which are enforced directly. The key part is the force that sustains rights (police, military, courts, ect.) is the only thing keeping them around.  When i say i have rights it is not a belief it is a very real fact.  

With that said I don’t agree with animal cruelty and I do respect life but it is an issue to be taken care of within our respective societies (which hopefully reflects the views of its peoples)

Furthermore, I believe that if people like you would take the energies they put into improving the lives of animals into improving the lives of humans then the world would truly be a better place


----------



## Andy (Jun 18, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> Ok - I accept that a lab mouse is, to some extent, a different, and less hostile ball game than a wild specimen. But then I read this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Let me guess, your a vegan?


How you can all abuse this guy/gal for making this video I dont know, maybe it will only eat live full grown mice?
Maybe the mouse had its claws and teeth removed?
Maybe it was a lab experiment?


----------



## becca81 (Jun 18, 2005)

Andy said:
			
		

> How you can all abuse this guy/gal for making this video I dont know, maybe it will only eat live full grown mice?


Haha... you're kidding, right?



			
				Andy said:
			
		

> Maybe the mouse had its claws and teeth removed?


No, now you *must* be kidding.    

A _G. rosea_ who *only* eats full grown mice?


----------



## Andy (Jun 18, 2005)

becca81 said:
			
		

> Haha... you're kidding, right?
> 
> 
> No, now you *must* be kidding.
> ...


Well you dont know, do you?
It could be that it kills and doesnt eat anything else.
Animals can do strange things


----------



## Crunchie (Jun 18, 2005)

Andy said:
			
		

> Well you dont know, do you?


I'd say it's about as likely as me killing a lion by poking it with a sharp stick.


----------



## Andy (Jun 18, 2005)

Crunchie said:
			
		

> I'd say it's about as likely as me killing a lion by poking it with a sharp stick.


So you agree, its still likely.


----------



## Runaway987 (Jun 18, 2005)

Can we all stop over analysing every picture and video we see of something eating something..

Its obvious the mouse was an unusually large prey item and carries the inherent risks we all know about. Its probably the sole reason it has lasted this long on the net.

I think your just meant to watch it and say either "Wow", "Cool", "Hmmm" or "Sick".

Respect for life is all well and good I like to think I respect "Life" but people wrap themselves up in this personification of small furry things like cats and dogs and rodents etc.  You wouldnt give a toss if you trod on an ant but that has just as much right to live as the mouse does surely?

See what you made me do? Argh im analysing it now...



Runaway


----------



## Sean (Jun 18, 2005)

shogun804 said:
			
		

> well the spider did look kind of small for that mouse but we all tend to over react in such instances lets face it how long have T's been around :? , and we treat them like they are babies, they are natural born killers. spiders in the wild do not have the luxury of taking down what ever prey they feel is safe, they attack, kill, then eat becasue who knows were their next meal is coming from, i mean there are pics of T's in the wild eating bats :?  of course you always have people saying why take the risk.....well the answer is simple becasue they want too.  im done critisizing people for how they feed their animals or inverts it is their money, their time and their problem, if something happens.


I pretty much agree with this guy...


----------



## Sean (Jun 18, 2005)

rastro111 said:
			
		

> Sure and I could very well kill a lion with a sharp stick.  My point is/was it’s not very likely.  If you are willing to take the small risk to observe your animal's behavior go ahead
> 
> cerbera, to clarify, what is so provocative about your statements to me is that you believe there is some sort of universal set of 'rights' that animals are entitled too as well as your concept of what rights are.  to me rights are not an abstract idea of entitlement I grant myself, but rather a real set of rules granted by my government (to whom I pay taxes) that are written into laws which are enforced directly. The key part is the force that sustains rights (police, military, courts, ect.) is the only thing keeping them around.  When i say i have rights it is not a belief it is a very real fact.
> 
> ...


This guy too...


----------



## Crunchie (Jun 18, 2005)

Andy said:
			
		

> So you agree, its still likely.


No I don't, and I think your comparison was silly to say the least though I expect you know that as well.


----------



## jbrd (Jun 18, 2005)

I think we have heard enough on this video, its all a mute point now.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 18, 2005)

There's a lovely debate going on giantspiders.com about exactly this sort of thing. Cultural differences in how we treat the animals we choose to live with. I hadn't looked back at this thread at all since my original post, but its all been going on here too, hasn't it ? (albeit in a slightly less dignified fashion).

My favourite bit so far has been when Andy asked me if I was a vegan


----------



## MizM (Jun 19, 2005)

jbrd said:
			
		

> I think we have heard enough on this video, its all a mute point now.


  WISH it was mute!! Do you mean moot?


----------



## becca81 (Jun 19, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> There's a lovely debate going on giantspiders.com about exactly this sort of thing. Cultural differences in how we treat the animals we choose to live with. I hadn't looked back at this thread at all since my original post, but its all been going on here too, hasn't it ? (albeit in a slightly less dignified fashion).
> 
> My favourite bit so far has been when Andy asked me if I was a vegan



Yeah, yeah.  

This thread isn't helping me at all...


----------



## edesign (Jun 19, 2005)

rastro111 said:
			
		

> cerbera, to clarify, what is so provocative about your statements to me is that you believe there is some sort of universal set of 'rights' that animals are entitled too as well as your concept of what rights are.  to me rights are not an abstract idea of entitlement I grant myself, but rather a real set of rules granted by my government (to whom I pay taxes) that are written into laws which are enforced directly. The key part is the force that sustains rights (police, military, courts, ect.) is the only thing keeping them around.  When i say i have rights it is not a belief it is a very real fact.


so you're basically saying a select few people of the entire population have the right to tell you what you have and don't have a right to? i hope not.

as for the animals not having rights, only humans...define "animals" because last time I checked that is exactly what a homo sapien is. By your own statement you are being a hypocrite. Or is this going to turn in to a religious viewpoint by which God tells you it is right so it must be so?



> Furthermore, I believe that if people like you would take the energies they put into improving the lives of animals into improving the lives of humans then the world would truly be a better place


i completely agree...a better place for us would ultimately be a better place for the other animals.

i didn't read the entire thread, just the last page...i don't agree with what the owners of the T did with the mouse, but I'm not going to sit there and tell them they're wrong. I'm going to assume that the T knew how big the prey was and had the option of turning it down (for the time being), if your mouth overrides your brain then Mother Nature will take care of you how she sees fit. That's like giving an adult a lit firecracker with a long fuse...if they throw it away they made the smart choice as they were educated about the situation and it's possible consequences. If they hold it and it blows a finger off...tough luck. Granted this is all based on me assuming that the T realizes how large the prey is and that large prey can present a safety problem. Slings will refuse food if it is too large, why wouldn't adults? I hope this made sense as i'm halfway rambling lol


----------



## jbrd (Jun 19, 2005)

MizM said:
			
		

> WISH it was mute!! Do you mean moot?


oops typo, my bad.


----------



## MizM (Jun 19, 2005)

jbrd said:
			
		

> oops typo, my bad.



It was a GOOD typo, this point SHOULD be mute!!!


----------



## blacktara (Jun 23, 2005)

*I dunno*

That mouse never had a chance if you ask me 

Anyway, it's off topic, but from one of the sites that had that video, THIS is hilarious


----------



## Mister Internet (Jun 23, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> Yes they do have rights, Rastro. They are alive, which makes them different to stationary objects. That alone would give them the right to a life *NOT exploited by us for our own entertainment*, in my book, just as you would no doubt award yourself the 'right' not to be exploited by anyone else. The faliure to realize this by certain individuals is perhaps the most worrying thing I have seen on this board. *Is it not obvious that if we take something from its home, and move it somewhere else because we want to look after it, for whatever reason - we OWE it to that animal to do it well, and maintain a respect for its life.*


(emphasis added by me)

I don't have a huge rambling post about this, I just find it funny that you believe that ALL animals have rights, among them the right not to be exploited, yet you keep captive T's.  Keeping animals in captivity is exploitation by definition, so you either need to make your peace with being your animals' KEEPER, or give them away.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 23, 2005)

*Round and around, and around we go...*



			
				Mister Internet said:
			
		

> (emphasis added by me)
> 
> I don't have a huge rambling post about this, I just find it funny that you believe that ALL animals have rights, among them the right not to be exploited, yet you keep captive T's.  Keeping animals in captivity is exploitation by definition, so you either need to make your peace with being your animals' KEEPER, or give them away.


Already dealt with this point, Mr Internet - see post 25 on this very thread.

I admit without hesitation that there are times when I feel morally reprehensible for choosing to have T's in my house. Had I known then what i know now about how they are collected, transported and sold, I might not have done. But for whatever reason I did, I did, so now my job is to live up to that repsonsilibilty. And that'll also be the reason I can't give them away. The only way that I can GUARANTEE that their every need will be attended to for the rest of their lives, is to keep them, and the responsibilty, with me.

But please give some thought to the following. There is, I believe, a massive difference in the LEVEL of exploitation going on between those who are content to watch their T's, doing what they do, when they want to do it, and those that repeatedly get them out to show them off and handle them, for no other reason than being 'entertained'. And it is this that I believe is unecessary and / or overly exploitational. My point was trying to highlight those differences, and that is all...

Dammit - have I been tempted back into posting on this thread again ?


----------



## FryLock (Jun 23, 2005)

Mister Internet said:
			
		

> Keeping animals in captivity is exploitation by definition, so you either need to make your peace with being your animals' KEEPER, or give them away.


:clap: :clap:.



			
				Cerbera said:
			
		

> Already dealt with this point, Mr Internet - see post 25 on this very thread.
> 
> I admit without hesitation that there are times when I feel morally reprehensible for choosing to have T's in my house. Had I known then what i know now about how they are collected, transported and sold, I might not have done. But for whatever reason I did, I did, so now my job is to live up to that repsonsilibilty. And that'll also be the reason I can't give them away. The only way that I can GUARANTEE that their every need will be attended to for the rest of their lives, is to keep them, and the responsibilty, with me.


But you at least disagree to agree and that is good .



			
				Cerbera said:
			
		

> But please give some thought to the following. There is, I believe, a massive difference in the LEVEL of exploitation going on between those who are content to watch their T's, doing what they do, when they want to do it, and those that repeatedly get them out to show them off and handle them, for no other reason than being 'entertained'. And it is this that I believe is unecessary and / or overly exploitational. My point was trying to highlight those differences, and that is all...


Yup i agree there, if you check some of the older thread's were spiders and other inverts had been injured or killed by live vert prey items (there arn't many but it does happen) you will see why most ppl don’t bovver with arguing the against case anymore , for me if you get a spider killed doing it it’s your own dumb luck/bad judgement, often the best lessons are those learned though pain. 



			
				Cerbera said:
			
		

> Dammit - have I been tempted back into posting on this thread again ?


Spare a thought for the rest of us to we had to click on it again too  .


----------



## GoTerps (Jun 23, 2005)

I wonder, Cerbera, do you eat animals?  Just curious.


----------



## DR zuum (Jun 23, 2005)

Give it a rest on the animal rights this and that,we use animals daily we have since the cave.The point on keeping animals is without doubt moot.As you are inflicting your will upon them its exploitation for your gratification,wrap your mind around it,whether you keep them  in clover and honey or feed them live mice,which they do kill and consume in the wild by the way.Most of you have never even seen a T in the wild some of you talk like they are these fragile defenseless creatures its almost laughable.

They are predators geared for killing they take down whatever they can find/catch and overcome/kill and most of the time they win.Since this thread went up,on weekends that i have time from work i've been going out in the evenings to the wild pops here,eventually i'll catch what i'm looking for on tape and then post it.You cant think for everybody or denigrate them because they dont embrace your philosophy of keeping/husbandry.

Because in truth its just your opinion,whether in the majority or minority thats all it is,nothing more nothing less,no moral superiority conferred from on high,just a opinion.Not right Not wrong,just your personal little viewpoint.And the people who choose to feed live mice or whatever have a right to thiers whatever it is,realism in keeping,recreating the struggle of nature,or just plain old self indulgence.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 23, 2005)

DR zuum said:
			
		

> And the people who choose to feed live mice or whatever have a right to thiers whatever it is,realism in keeping,recreating the struggle of nature,or just plain old self indulgence.


And all the time there are people like those you describe above, there will be a need to present another viewpoint. This is the whole point of these boards, surely?  I'd taken it as read that I am aware my opinion is worth as little or as much as anyone else's.  If I have denigrated anyone, and i would dispute that - its an attitude that I denigrate, not individuals, and I believe I am as free to do that as you, or anyone else is. If, however, my comments have been left open to misinterpretation as personally insulting, then of course for that, I apologize unreservedly.


----------



## Mister Internet (Jun 23, 2005)

Cerbera said:
			
		

> I admit without hesitation that there are times when I feel morally reprehensible for choosing to have T's in my house. Had I known then what i know now about how they are collected, transported and sold, I might not have done. But for whatever reason I did, I did, so now my job is to live up to that repsonsilibilty. And that'll also be the reason I can't give them away. The only way that I can GUARANTEE that their every need will be attended to for the rest of their lives, is to keep them, and the responsibilty, with me.


So does this mean you plan on never purchasing additional tarantulas again?



			
				Cerbera said:
			
		

> But please give some thought to the following. There is, I believe, a massive difference in the LEVEL of exploitation going on between those who are content to watch their T's, doing what they do, when they want to do it, and those that repeatedly get them out to show them off and handle them, for no other reason than being 'entertained'. And it is this that I believe is unecessary and / or overly exploitational. My point was trying to highlight those differences, and that is all...


I understand the difference, but the corollary point also remains: exploitation is exploitation, period.  There's no exploitation that's "better" than others, IMO.  I'm one of those who believes that all life is NOT equal, and that due consideration must be given to the level of sentience a certain organism has.  I feel no qualms whatsoever about dismembering a cricket.  I would feel horrible about throwing a kitten into a wood chipper.  What's the difference?  Well, I'm fairly certain the cricket would neither know nor care that its limbs were being pulled off, and that it was dying.  The kitten, however, I KNOW has a higher central nervous system, and will feel pain if I throw it into the wood chipper.  I agree it doesn't speak well of a person who only uses invertebrate animals for "showing off", but to say they are somehow immoral because of it is going to far, I think.


----------



## Sheri (Jun 23, 2005)

Interesting point, I suppose MR. I. ButI don't believe that all exploitation is equal.

However, I would make the point that the difference lies in the root of the motivation. What is the person getting out of it? Where does the pleasure lie in seeing a T attack the mouse.

I've recently decided to sell off the majority of my collection because seeing a T in a terrarium does little for me now after seeing them in the wild.


----------



## Cerbera (Jun 23, 2005)

Mr Internet - I don't know enough about your namesake to even attempt the level of quotes within quotes that you do, so I'll answer the questions straight, if you don't mind...

1. So I won't be purchasing additional tarantulas then ?

Yes, but only captive bred, and never from a pet store. Only from trusted hobbyists who know the entire history of their animals, and whom I have known personally for some time.

2. Yes, exploitation is exploitation, full stop. 

But you cannot tell me that hand rearing an animal, and treating it well, attending to its every need etc etc is exploitation in anything like the same league as going to a pet shop, buying a T, throwing it round in a cardboard box for 5 days, pulling its legs off, and eventually killing it through neglect, starvation, or something else suitably hideous, for absolutely no reason at all.

My point rermains the same - I merely believe life should be treated with respect, and for all the interesting points raised here, some of which have changed my mind about aspects of what i think, the main theme remains unchallenged...

After reading Sheri's post, I imagine I'd be the same. If I could see T's in the wild, that's where I'd really like to see them...


----------



## Sheri (Jun 23, 2005)

More on exploitation is exploitation - and if we were to extend that to crime and law... (which isn't that much of a stretch even in animals terms.)

There would be but one sentence for all crimes. 

Kinda like comparing a puppy mill to a dedicated dog owner.


----------

