Facepalm worthy tarantula/invert articles from the internet

[TechnoGeek]

Might as well get it started:

The article is about the Brazilian black tarantula but I'm pretty sure this isn't a Grammostola pulchra, or even a tarantula at all lol. I think this is a velvet spider which isn't even a mygalomorph. I'm pretty sure a care sheet becomes that much more trustworthy when you start it with a photo of a different animal to the one it's about

Let's see what you guys can find

 

[Eagle555 Jumping spiders]

Might as well get it started:

The article is about the Brazilian black tarantula but I'm pretty sure this isn't a Grammostola pulchra, or even a tarantula at all lol. I think this is a velvet spider which isn't even a mygalomorph. I'm pretty sure a care sheet becomes that much more trustworthy when you start it with a photo of a different animal to the one it's about

Let's see what you guys can find

I have G. pulchra and indeed this is a velvet spider Eresus genus I need one of them lol

 

[Cmac2111]

https://www.peta.org/blog/hairshooting-tarantula-gets-revenge-owner/ - A true classic

Makes me facepalm mainly because of the sentence that claims tarantulas suffer from loneliness, I feel like a part of my soul left me after reading that...

 

[TechnoGeek]

https://www.peta.org/blog/hairshooting-tarantula-gets-revenge-owner/ - A true classic

Makes me facepalm mainly because of the sentence that claims tarantulas suffer from loneliness, I feel like a part of my soul left me after reading that...

I think you have my op easily beat, this is some of the least intelligent stuff I've read in my life. Look at this:

Tarantulas are highly intelligent animals who build tented shelters, and they’re compassionate

Facepalm galore.. I mean in all fairness, I can agree with him since intelligence is relative, and compared to whoever wrote that sorry mess tarantulas are indeed an 8 legged Einstein (if digging a hole in the ground is all it takes to impress him with regards to intelligence), but that's not exactly a high bar to clear as it seems.

Compassionate?? If his idea of compassionate is eat your partner after getting laid that dude would make Jeff Dahmer look like Justin Bieber.

Peta is a joke, they're not just anthropomorphizing a primitive animal, that's just being dumb.

I have G. pulchra and indeed this is a velvet spider Eresus genus I need one of them lol

I have a G pulchra too and I'm looking been that pic and my T:

And I'm like:

 

[Wolf135]

https://www.peta.org/blog/hairshooting-tarantula-gets-revenge-owner/ - A true classic

Makes me facepalm mainly because of the sentence that claims tarantulas suffer from loneliness, I feel like a part of my soul left me after reading that...

"Tarantulas and other animals such as hedgehogs, lizards, and macaws who are purchased as pets suffer from the overwhelming stress of unnatural confinement and loneliness"

Meanwhile all my Ts stay confined in their burrows 95% of the time.

 

[TechnoGeek]

"Tarantulas and other animals such as hedgehogs, lizards, and macaws who are purchased as pets suffer from the overwhelming stress of unnatural confinement and loneliness"

Meanwhile all my Ts stay confined in their burrows 95% of the time.

I hate these politically correct alligator tears people who make it sound as though life in captivity is hell for an animal and nature is such a peaceful and happy existence for them...

You can love nature and still understand that it just isn't nice at all as far as animals are concerned, it's a constant struggle for survival, against everything from parasites to predators to weather and even their own kind (competition for food mating etc). If the keeper is responsible and does things right, an animal living in captivity is much luckier than one living in the wild.

 

[Wolf135]

I hate these politically correct alligator tears people who make it sound as though life in captivity is hell for an animal and nature is such a peaceful and happy existence for them...

You can love nature and still understand that it just isn't nice at all as far as animals are concerned, it's a constant struggle for survival, against everything from parasites to predators to weather and even their own kind (competition for food mating etc). If the keeper is responsible and does things right, an animal living in captivity is much luckier than one living in the wild.

Most animals in captivity live years longer and have better health overall of course vegans never acknowledge facts that don't fit their narratives.

 

[TechnoGeek]

I'm pretty sure most people here seen this:

GOLIATH BIRD-EATING TARANTULA'S BRUTAL BITE | Kings of Pain | #Shorts

The largest tarantula on the planet has a pretty intense bite, in this clip from Kings of Pain.#KingsofPainSubscribe for more from Kings of Pain and other gr...

youtube.com

The T isn't a Goliath birdeater, I'm pretty sure it's a L parahybana and the whole time I'm watching the video I'm thinking are they really gonna use a "poor man's Goliath birdeater"?? And they indeed did just that... Plus I'm not a fan of the hassle they put the T through to force a bite, I've held my L parahybana while she was kicking hairs and she still wouldn't bite me.. I'm sure if she wasn't pressed down like that the poor thing wouldn't have wanted to bite

 

[klawfran3]

Most animals in captivity live years longer and have better health overall of course vegans never acknowledge facts that don't fit their narratives.

To be honest, I would not say most. I would be willing to say that most animals actually do not do great in captivity. For mammals, it tends to be easier to keep them just because we have a great understanding of mammal biology, and insects/arachnids are pretty simple so it's easy to meet their needs. That being said, the vast majority of mammals wouldn't do great in captivity unless lots of money and time and space is dedicated to keeping them, and even then we aren't too great at it. Herbivores especially tend to be neurotic and anxious, which is why for many domesticated herbivore species you see a reduction in brain size. The part of the brain that is reduced the most is the part that controls fear response, because the ones who were less likely to freak the hell out when a hairless ape interacted with them were the most likely to survive. Lots of mammals have specific dietary needs or live in environments/have behaviors that make keeping them in captivity not very successful. Unless they are domesticated, they don't really have a great time. There's a reason that of the thousands of species of mammals and animals around the world we domesticated maybe a baker's dozen of them, and it's because most don't do well in captivity. They have too niche a diet, their life histories are too complex, or they just can't handle the stress of being kept by people. Big cats pacing enclosures, hooved animals cribbing on pens, excessive grooming and chewing, self mutilation, all of these are common aspects of wild animals not doing great in captivity and can commonly be seen with captive wild (non domesticated) animals.

Birds *especially* don't do great in captivity. Over half of all captive parrots pluck their feathers and have neurotic behaviors, and bird medical care is honestly a joke. We don't have a great understanding of it and most of the work we do tends to just be extrapolated from mammals. Being locked in a cage isn't just bad for their mental health, but their physical too. The vast majority of pet birds (pushing 100%) have skeletal issues (osteoporosis) and muscle issues from not being able to fly the dozens of miles they do in nature. They've evolved to do that, and it keeps their physiology strong. The understanding of parrot diets is poor, and every year we learn something new that we were doing wrong. Birds in captivity usually have shortened lifespans, often dying when middle aged because of poor diets and care that was once the "cutting edge" science. The ones that live the longest? Well, they were lucky, and you tend to hear about them more than the ones who die. It's called survivorship bias. You should look it up if you haven't heard of it, because it heavily influenced our views on most things in the world. For every parrot that hits 80 years old, 99 of them die before they're 50. But you hear more about the older one so you think they all live that long. It's like that for every animal out there. A recent study came out that showed that over 90% of nonmammal pets don't survive their first year being owned.

I wouldn't take the fact that sometimes animals live longer in captivity to mean that they're better off there. For a non-domesticated animal, being confined usually means their mental health takes a serious hit and they develop neurotic behaviors. You see it in zoo animals constantly. Hell, we can't even grow most bacteria in a lab either.

All that being said, Im not saying that no animals do good in captivity, either. Tarantulas do GREAT. Predatory invertebrates in general seem to do pretty good, but that's because we can grow a few select feeders to feed them. Once you move to fungivores and herbivores, things tend to take a downturn. A lot of insects have specific host plants that aren't easy to culture on a mass scale.

I'm getting bored of writing. it's late and I'm tired, but I don't agree with you that most animals do good in captivity. It's just that the animals you see doing good in captivity provide you with a confirmation bias that they all do great. No one ever wants to show the ones doing bad. I work in animal care and animal rescue. Ive worked at zoos and aquariums, and I have a lot of first hand experience with the fact that animals in general don't usually do great in captivity.

That being said, I think tarantulas do great in captivity, mainly because they are simple creatures with simple needs that are easily met. There isn't a lot of mental complexity to mess up with them, and they're content sitting in the same hole for years, waiting for a bug to walk by. It's really hard to mess that up.

 

[Wolf135]

To be honest, I would not say most. I would be willing to say that most animals actually do not do great in captivity. For mammals, it tends to be easier to keep them just because we have a great understanding of mammal biology, and insects/arachnids are pretty simple so it's easy to meet their needs. That being said, the vast majority of mammals wouldn't do great in captivity unless lots of money and time and space is dedicated to keeping them, and even then we aren't too great at it. Herbivores especially tend to be neurotic and anxious, which is why for many domesticated herbivore species you see a reduction in brain size. The part of the brain that is reduced the most is the part that controls fear response, because the ones who were less likely to freak the hell out when a hairless ape interacted with them were the most likely to survive. Lots of mammals have specific dietary needs or live in environments/have behaviors that make keeping them in captivity not very successful. Unless they are domesticated, they don't really have a great time. There's a reason that of the thousands of species of mammals and animals around the world we domesticated maybe a baker's dozen of them, and it's because most don't do well in captivity. They have too niche a diet, their life histories are too complex, or they just can't handle the stress of being kept by people. Big cats pacing enclosures, hooved animals cribbing on pens, excessive grooming and chewing, self mutilation, all of these are common aspects of wild animals not doing great in captivity and can commonly be seen with captive wild (non domesticated) animals.

Birds *especially* don't do great in captivity. Over half of all captive parrots pluck their feathers and have neurotic behaviors, and bird medical care is honestly a joke. We don't have a great understanding of it and most of the work we do tends to just be extrapolated from mammals. Being locked in a cage isn't just bad for their mental health, but their physical too. The vast majority of pet birds (pushing 100%) have skeletal issues (osteoporosis) and muscle issues from not being able to fly the dozens of miles they do in nature. They've evolved to do that, and it keeps their physiology strong. The understanding of parrot diets is poor, and every year we learn something new that we were doing wrong. Birds in captivity usually have shortened lifespans, often dying when middle aged because of poor diets and care that was once the "cutting edge" science. The ones that live the longest? Well, they were lucky, and you tend to hear about them more than the ones who die. It's called survivorship bias. You should look it up if you haven't heard of it, because it heavily influenced our views on most things in the world. For every parrot that hits 80 years old, 99 of them die before they're 50. But you hear more about the older one so you think they all live that long. It's like that for every animal out there. A recent study came out that showed that over 90% of nonmammal pets don't survive their first year being owned.

I wouldn't take the fact that sometimes animals live longer in captivity to mean that they're better off there. For a non-domesticated animal, being confined usually means their mental health takes a serious hit and they develop neurotic behaviors. You see it in zoo animals constantly. Hell, we can't even grow most bacteria in a lab either.

All that being said, Im not saying that no animals do good in captivity, either. Tarantulas do GREAT. Predatory invertebrates in general seem to do pretty good, but that's because we can grow a few select feeders to feed them. Once you move to fungivores and herbivores, things tend to take a downturn. A lot of insects have specific host plants that aren't easy to culture on a mass scale.

I'm getting bored of writing. it's late and I'm tired, but I don't agree with you that most animals do good in captivity. It's just that the animals you see doing good in captivity provide you with a confirmation bias that they all do great. No one ever wants to show the ones doing bad. I work in animal care and animal rescue. Ive worked at zoos and aquariums, and I have a lot of first hand experience with the fact that animals in general don't usually do great in captivity.

That being said, I think tarantulas do great in captivity, mainly because they are simple creatures with simple needs that are easily met. There isn't a lot of mental complexity to mess up with them, and they're content sitting in the same hole for years, waiting for a bug to walk by. It's really hard to mess that up.

More animals die out in the wild from being hunted by predators or disease, my family also had a cockatoo who lived to be 40 and was passed on from my grandparents.

Sure bird vets might not be all that great but as time progresses so will the research of how these animals will be cared for, also animals that humans have as pets are at an advantage since the chances of them going extinct are slim since they could be reintroduced into the wild.

 

[curtisgiganteus]

"Tarantulas and other animals such as hedgehogs, lizards, and macaws who are purchased as pets suffer from the overwhelming stress of unnatural confinement and loneliness"

Meanwhile all my Ts stay confined in their burrows 95% of the time.

Less than 15% of slings in the wild make it to adulthood. 97%+ do in captivity. I dare say we are giving babies a chance at life! Lol

 

[Wolf135]

Less than 15% of slings in the wild make it to adulthood. 97%+ do in captivity. I dare say we are giving babies a chance at life! Lol

Definitely, tarantulas are definitely doing a lot better in captivity than in the wild.

 

[TechnoGeek]

To be honest, I would not say most. I would be willing to say that most animals actually do not do great in captivity. For mammals, it tends to be easier to keep them just because we have a great understanding of mammal biology, and insects/arachnids are pretty simple so it's easy to meet their needs. That being said, the vast majority of mammals wouldn't do great in captivity unless lots of money and time and space is dedicated to keeping them, and even then we aren't too great at it. Herbivores especially tend to be neurotic and anxious, which is why for many domesticated herbivore species you see a reduction in brain size. The part of the brain that is reduced the most is the part that controls fear response, because the ones who were less likely to freak the hell out when a hairless ape interacted with them were the most likely to survive. Lots of mammals have specific dietary needs or live in environments/have behaviors that make keeping them in captivity not very successful. Unless they are domesticated, they don't really have a great time. There's a reason that of the thousands of species of mammals and animals around the world we domesticated maybe a baker's dozen of them, and it's because most don't do well in captivity. They have too niche a diet, their life histories are too complex, or they just can't handle the stress of being kept by people. Big cats pacing enclosures, hooved animals cribbing on pens, excessive grooming and chewing, self mutilation, all of these are common aspects of wild animals not doing great in captivity and can commonly be seen with captive wild (non domesticated) animals.

Birds *especially* don't do great in captivity. Over half of all captive parrots pluck their feathers and have neurotic behaviors, and bird medical care is honestly a joke. We don't have a great understanding of it and most of the work we do tends to just be extrapolated from mammals. Being locked in a cage isn't just bad for their mental health, but their physical too. The vast majority of pet birds (pushing 100%) have skeletal issues (osteoporosis) and muscle issues from not being able to fly the dozens of miles they do in nature. They've evolved to do that, and it keeps their physiology strong. The understanding of parrot diets is poor, and every year we learn something new that we were doing wrong. Birds in captivity usually have shortened lifespans, often dying when middle aged because of poor diets and care that was once the "cutting edge" science. The ones that live the longest? Well, they were lucky, and you tend to hear about them more than the ones who die. It's called survivorship bias. You should look it up if you haven't heard of it, because it heavily influenced our views on most things in the world. For every parrot that hits 80 years old, 99 of them die before they're 50. But you hear more about the older one so you think they all live that long. It's like that for every animal out there. A recent study came out that showed that over 90% of nonmammal pets don't survive their first year being owned.

I wouldn't take the fact that sometimes animals live longer in captivity to mean that they're better off there. For a non-domesticated animal, being confined usually means their mental health takes a serious hit and they develop neurotic behaviors. You see it in zoo animals constantly. Hell, we can't even grow most bacteria in a lab either.

All that being said, Im not saying that no animals do good in captivity, either. Tarantulas do GREAT. Predatory invertebrates in general seem to do pretty good, but that's because we can grow a few select feeders to feed them. Once you move to fungivores and herbivores, things tend to take a downturn. A lot of insects have specific host plants that aren't easy to culture on a mass scale.

I'm getting bored of writing. it's late and I'm tired, but I don't agree with you that most animals do good in captivity. It's just that the animals you see doing good in captivity provide you with a confirmation bias that they all do great. No one ever wants to show the ones doing bad. I work in animal care and animal rescue. Ive worked at zoos and aquariums, and I have a lot of first hand experience with the fact that animals in general don't usually do great in captivity.

That being said, I think tarantulas do great in captivity, mainly because they are simple creatures with simple needs that are easily met. There isn't a lot of mental complexity to mess up with them, and they're content sitting in the same hole for years, waiting for a bug to walk by. It's really hard to mess that up.

Can't read all of this wall of text but I did go through it quickly and most of it is wrong. Especially saying that most animals do better in the wild, this is just false.

I have 2 parrots, neither of them stays in a cage most of the day. Also the notion that they can fly wherever they want in the wild isn't correct, not unless they don't care about getting killed by a predator or attacked by other birds defending their territory. Yeah they probably have more space than my house in the wild, but you know what else they have? Predators, parasites, competition for food, competition for mates, competition for the best nesting spots, competition for just about everything, and if that's not enough they also have to contend with environmental factors and the elements, and if that's not enough yet their young can succumb to everything from hunger to nest raiders to even ants adding more stress.

It's also incorrect that we don't understand dietary requirements for most wild animals, if their diet was incompatible with their needs it would lead to deteriorating health and a shorter lifespan. We have rehab centers taking care of even baby animals before releasing them to the wild and they're able to simulate the nutrition the baby gets in the wild. Living longer certainly means they're doing better, a longer lifespan is strongly related to less stress and better health. You can't be less healthy and yet live longer unless you're hooked to life support.

Which reminds me that captive animals get veterinary care. For a captive animal a wound or injury usually means a vet bill for the owner or caretaker, for a wild animal it could mean an infection leading to a slow and painful death.

Of course this all assumes that proper care is being taken of the animal in captivity, and proper husbandry is provided. I'm not talking about your average dude trying to keep a tiger in their apartment, you have to have the means to properly house and care for the animal. But you saying limited space overcomes the benefits of no stress no parasites no predation no competition and often better food is biased and false. Sorry.

If you're a camper or outdoors person you should know that it barely takes anything to get into deep trouble in nature. Drink from the wrong place at the wrong time and you can get protozoa, intestinal worms, amoeba, or another parasite. Wander into the wrong place at the wrong time and you could get attacked by a predator, cut yourself for whatever reason and your wound could turn septic, hell if you're in a hot ir humid enough place maggots could fester in your wounds. And I've barely even scratched the surface.

 

[Mountaindani]

https://www.peta.org/blog/hairshooting-tarantula-gets-revenge-owner/ - A true classic

Makes me facepalm mainly because of the sentence that claims tarantulas suffer from loneliness, I feel like a part of my soul left me after reading that...

Our poor lonely tarantulas. If only I had known. I will stick my big face near their enclosures way more now to help them that.
Thank you Peta! Great info as always

 

[klawfran3]

More animals die out in the wild from being hunted by predators or disease, my family also had a cockatoo who lived to be 40 and was passed on from my grandparents.

Sure bird vets might not be all that great but as time progresses so will the research of how these animals will be cared for, also animals that humans have as pets are at an advantage since the chances of them going extinct are slim since they could be reintroduced into the wild.

Cockatoos are supposed to live to about 70-80 years old. That's still middle aged when yours died, which proves my point.
Plus, there is really no way we are going to release these animals back into the wild if they go extinct. It's a nice thought, and I see that argument on forums constantly for every species. But honestly just think about it for ten seconds and you'll see why it isn't going to happen.
For example, loss of thousands of years of generational knowledge from wild ancestors is a start. Doesn't happen with Ts, sure, but with vertebrates it's a huge issue. Our captive bred animals (especially vertebrates) are usually inbred. They have behaviors that don't help them survive in the wild, or can damage their survival. They're often hybridized or genetically muddled that we don't really know what they are. Even researchers have said it about pokies, and call them "hobby forms". Plus when we help every individual survive to adulthood and then breed them, odds are all of the weaker specimens with poor genetics survive and reproduce, making animals bred in captivity poor survivors. It's a great thought and people love to believe we are some ark of survival for tons of species, but honestly it's not going to happen. Captive breeding projects for animals are intensive and take millions of dollars, and scientists have to be very careful about all of these problems I listed and more.

Can't read all of this wall of text but I did go through it quickly and most of it is wrong. Especially saying that most animals do better in the wild, this is just false.

So you didn't read it, but you say everything is wrong. I'm not sure where your credentials lie to say I'm wrong but I have degrees in wildlife and fisheries biology, I work in animal care and have worked at multiple zoos and aquariums around the country, and I talk with some of the leading exotics vets.

I have 2 parrots, neither of them stays in a cage most of the day. Also the notion that they can fly wherever they want in the wild isn't correct, not unless they don't care about getting killed by a predator or attacked by other birds defending their territory. Yeah they probably have more space than my house in the wild, but you know what else they have? Predators, parasites, competition for food, competition for mates, competition for the best nesting spots, competition for just about everything, and if that's not enough they also have to contend with environmental factors and the elements, and if that's not enough yet their young can succumb to everything from hunger to nest raiders to even ants adding more stress.

I never said they can fly everywhere they want and that makes them healthy because of it, I said their bodies are adapted to the stress of flying dozens of miles a day, escaping predators, finding food, meeting other flocks, etc. and that taking it away causes health problems. I have parrots too, bud. And I work at an animal rescue that works with parrots. I also have communicated with some of the biggest names in avian medicine in the US. We see it constantly. It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a real, observable issue that captive parrots have medical issues brought on by captivity.
Yes the wild animals have to fight for survival, but when we put them in captivity and they don't do that, they become neurotic and anxious and develop what are called "stereotyped behaviors" that kead to mental health decline and cause different health problems. Their diets in captivity are pretty poor and new science is always changing it, and so many birds die young. I'm not talking about the acute "broken arm or predation" issues that are easily treated but real, chronic lingering diseases like liver failure, kidney failure, skeletal and muscle issues, etc. that we genuinely dont know how to treat.

It's also incorrect that we don't understand dietary requirements for most wild animals, if their diet was incompatible with their needs it would lead to deteriorating health and a shorter lifespan. We have rehab centers taking care of even baby animals before releasing them to the wild and they're able to simulate the nutrition the baby gets in the wild. Living longer certainly means they're doing better, a longer lifespan is strongly related to less stress and better health. You can't be less healthy and yet live longer unless you're hooked to life support.

temporary feeding to rehabilitate a wild animal =/= having an animal live it's entire life on the diet. When you rehab you give them the best food you can until you release them, which is temporary. When you give captive animals the same diet for their whole lives, over time they show health problems related to the diet because we don't know everything they need. Again, parrots are a GREAT example. Everyone thought they needed seeds for years, now it's been shown that parrots on an all seed diet have fatty livers, liver failure, and die usually by the time they hit 30. Poor diet is one of the leading cause of health issues in most captive animals, again, because we don't actually know what they need. Toucans are another perfect example. We kept having toucans die of iron poisoning, and it was because of the iron rich fruit we were giving them. When we stopped that, toucans started living a bit longer, but then started dying due to diabetes. And it's because our man made fruit had been bred to have so much sugar in it that it literally causes diabetes in a frugivore. This is a big problem, and we still don't have a good diet for most animals.

Of course this all assumes that proper care is being taken of the animal in captivity, and proper husbandry is provided. I'm not talking about your average dude trying to keep a tiger in their apartment, you have to have the means to properly house and care for the animal. But you saying limited space overcomes the benefits of no stress no parasites no predation no competition and often better food is biased and false. Sorry.

You are true in a sense. But what you're forgetting is that we don't have the proper care for MOST animals out there. We don't know what they need, or we are bad at providing it. Why do you think you see the same 20 species of animals at zoos, when there are thousands and thousands of species out there we can choose from? Because we aren't actually that good at providing proper care and these ones do OK with what we provice. Again, it's survivorship bias. You keep falling into that trap. You see the ones that do ok and say "see! They all do good!" But it's just not true.

If you're a camper or outdoors person you should know that it barely takes anything to get into deep trouble in nature. Drink from the wrong place at the wrong time and you can get protozoa, intestinal worms, amoeba, or another parasite. Wander into the wrong place at the wrong time and you could get attacked by a predator, cut yourself for whatever reason and your wound could turn septic, hell if you're in a hot ir humid enough place maggots could fester in your wounds. And I've barely even scratched the surface.

lmao was a licensed guide and am certified wilderness first responder. You're saying this like some weird gotcha when all you're describing is the fact that we have medical care. I'm not talking about just medical care, but the actual diet, husbandry, and full life care of the animal. Just giving them a bandaid on a boo boo doesn't make us experts on the animal, anything will live longer when you remove it's parasites and acute issues like broken bones. It's treating the chronic health problems that they might have that we really aren't good at. Liver failure, kidney failure, bone and muscle issues, etc. We just aren't good at ANY of that for things that aren't people or dogs.

I'm not here to start a flame fight, and I hope there's no bad blood between us, because I know how heated these discussions can get. I love keeping animals and exotic animals are some of my favorite pets. But when so many individuals do so poorly in captivity (parrots as the prime example) we need to sit back and ask if we actually are giving them good care. They still die young, just from other diseases and not predators, they have mental issues and neurotic stereotyped behaviors, and we honestly don't know medical care for them that well. Dr Echols, one of the leading avian medicine expert in the US, has literally said that keeping them in captivity causes this.

 

[TechnoGeek]

Cockatoos are supposed to live to about 70-80 years old. That's still middle aged when yours died, which proves my point.
Plus, there is really no way we are going to release these animals back into the wild if they go extinct. It's a nice thought, and I see that argument on forums constantly for every species. But honestly just think about it for ten seconds and you'll see why it isn't going to happen.
For example, loss of thousands of years of generational knowledge from wild ancestors is a start. Doesn't happen with Ts, sure, but with vertebrates it's a huge issue. Our captive bred animals (especially vertebrates) are usually inbred. They have behaviors that don't help them survive in the wild, or can damage their survival. They're often hybridized or genetically muddled that we don't really know what they are. Even researchers have said it about pokies, and call them "hobby forms". Plus when we help every individual survive to adulthood and then breed them, odds are all of the weaker specimens with poor genetics survive and reproduce, making animals bred in captivity poor survivors. It's a great thought and people love to believe we are some ark of survival for tons of species, but honestly it's not going to happen. Captive breeding projects for animals are intensive and take millions of dollars, and scientists have to be very careful about all of these problems I listed and more.


So you didn't read it, but you say everything is wrong. I'm not sure where your credentials lie to say I'm wrong but I have degrees in wildlife and fisheries biology, I work in animal care and have worked at multiple zoos and aquariums around the country, and I talk with some of the leading exotics vets.


I never said they can fly everywhere they want and that makes them healthy because of it, I said their bodies are adapted to the stress of flying dozens of miles a day, escaping predators, finding food, meeting other flocks, etc. and that taking it away causes health problems. I have parrots too, bud. And I work at an animal rescue that works with parrots. I also have communicated with some of the biggest names in avian medicine in the US. We see it constantly. It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a real, observable issue that captive parrots have medical issues brought on by captivity.
Yes the wild animals have to fight for survival, but when we put them in captivity and they don't do that, they become neurotic and anxious and develop what are called "stereotyped behaviors" that kead to mental health decline and cause different health problems. Their diets in captivity are pretty poor and new science is always changing it, and so many birds die young. I'm not talking about the acute "broken arm or predation" issues that are easily treated but real, chronic lingering diseases like liver failure, kidney failure, skeletal and muscle issues, etc. that we genuinely dont know how to treat.


temporary feeding to rehabilitate a wild animal =/= having an animal live it's entire life on the diet. When you rehab you give them the best food you can until you release them, which is temporary. When you give captive animals the same diet for their whole lives, over time they show health problems related to the diet because we don't know everything they need. Again, parrots are a GREAT example. Everyone thought they needed seeds for years, now it's been shown that parrots on an all seed diet have fatty livers, liver failure, and die usually by the time they hit 30. Poor diet is one of the leading cause of health issues in most captive animals, again, because we don't actually know what they need. Toucans are another perfect example. We kept having toucans die of iron poisoning, and it was because of the iron rich fruit we were giving them. When we stopped that, toucans started living a bit longer, but then started dying due to diabetes. And it's because our man made fruit had been bred to have so much sugar in it that it literally causes diabetes in a frugivore. This is a big problem, and we still don't have a good diet for most animals.


You are true in a sense. But what you're forgetting is that we don't have the proper care for MOST animals out there. We don't know what they need, or we are bad at providing it. Why do you think you see the same 20 species of animals at zoos, when there are thousands and thousands of species out there we can choose from? Because we aren't actually that good at providing proper care and these ones do OK with what we provice. Again, it's survivorship bias. You keep falling into that trap. You see the ones that do ok and say "see! They all do good!" But it's just not true.
lmao was a licensed guide and am certified wilderness first responder. You're saying this like some weird gotcha when all you're describing is the fact that we have medical care. I'm not talking about just medical care, but the actual diet, husbandry, and full life care of the animal. Just giving them a bandaid on a boo boo doesn't make us experts on the animal, anything will live longer when you remove it's parasites and acute issues like broken bones. It's treating the chronic health problems that they might have that we really aren't good at. Liver failure, kidney failure, bone and muscle issues, etc. We just aren't good at ANY of that for things that aren't people or dogs.

I'm not here to start a flame fight, and I hope there's no bad blood between us, because I know how heated these discussions can get. I love keeping animals and exotic animals are some of my favorite pets. But when so many individuals do so poorly in captivity (parrots as the prime example) we need to sit back and ask if we actually are giving them good care. They still die young, just from other diseases and not predators, they have mental issues and neurotic stereotyped behaviors, and we honestly don't know medical care for them that well. Dr Echols, one of the leading avian medicine expert in the US, has literally said that keeping them in captivity causes this.

No offense meant, but anyone can be anything they want on the internet, doesn't change the face that so far nothing you said has been correct or made any sense, and the trend continues. For example in your reply to another poster you said cockatoos are supposed to live 70 or 80 years? Here's an academic article from science daily saying researchers observed they live up to 30 years in the wild:

the researchers revealed that species such as the scarlet macaw and sulphur-crested cockatoo have extremely long average lifespans, of up to 30 years, which are usually seen only in large birds.

Unravelling the mystery of parrot longevity: Bigger brains have led some species of parrot to live surprisingly long lives, new research shows

Bigger brains have led some species of parrot to live surprisingly long lives, new research shows.

www.sciencedaily.com

So his bird survived about 30% longer than the maximum lifespan in the wild.

If you have an academic source that says they were commonly observe to live for 70 or 80 years, I'd like to see it.

I wonder why I don't see these medical issues brought on by captivity. I'll go on a hunch and say, again no disrespect meant, that none of what you said is true including your alleged background. If I can see anything from your sources or "biggest names in aviary medicine" confirming that parrots, or any animal invariably suffer in captivity I'll be convinced. But, again with respect, you don't sound professional at all, you don't use citation to back your claims, nor do you phrase yourself in a way a scientist would tbh.

Actually you sound like the average vegan Karen thinking nature is a loving mother and life in captivity is slavery for the animals, probably the only reason said people have such ideas is because they've never set foot in the wild and know about surviving in nature what my grandma knows about CrossFit.

 

[klawfran3]

No offense meant, but anyone can be anything they want on the internet, doesn't change the face that so far nothing you said has been correct or made any sense, and the trend continues. For example in your reply to another poster you said cockatoos are supposed to live 70 or 80 years? Here's an academic article from science daily saying researchers observed they live up to 30 years in the wild:

Unravelling the mystery of parrot longevity: Bigger brains have led some species of parrot to live surprisingly long lives, new research shows

Bigger brains have led some species of parrot to live surprisingly long lives, new research shows.

www.sciencedaily.com

So his bird survived about 30% longer than the maximum lifespan in the wild.

If you have an academic source that says they were commonly observe to live for 70 or 80 years, I'd like to see it.

I wonder why I don't see these medical issues brought on by captivity. I'll go on a hunch and say, again no disrespect meant, that none of what you said is true including your alleged background. If I can see anything from your sources or "biggest names in aviary medicine" confirming that parrots, or any animal invariably suffer in captivity I'll be convinced. But, again with respect, you don't sound professional at all, you don't use citation to back your claims, nor do you phrase yourself in a way a scientist would tbh.

Actually you sound like the average vegan Karen thinking nature is a loving mother and life in captivity is slavery for the animals, probably the only reason said people have such ideas is because they've never set foot in the wild and know about surviving in nature what my grandma knows about CrossFit.

I'm not going to doxx myself anymore to prove a point, and honestly I don't have anything to prove to you. I am who I am, and you can believe it or not. The fact that you're resorting to attacking me personally tells me all I need to know. You do you, keep on calling people names All I said is that I don't think "most" animals do well in captivity and provided reasons as to why, and you only have told me that parrots live longer in captivity and called me names. The fact that you also haven't addressed anything I said but just keep saying "its wrong" speaks volumes.

Here's a few sources to read at your leisure as to welfare concerns of parrots as companion animals and keeping them in captivity. Lifespan is moot when they are not doing great physically or mentally. I also never said I am a professional scientist, that's you putting words in my mouth. I studied wildlife and fisheries biology in college and work at zoos and animal rescues. Not that hard to believe, but hey, you keep on believing whatever you want. This'll be the last I respond to you, since clearly you don't have in interest in politeness or being civil. Hope you have a good day, buddy.

Oxidative stress, activity behaviour and body mass in captive parrots

Captive breeding programmes are common for many parrot species. We show that in small parrots kept in standard cages with ad libitum food, high weight gain was

academic.oup.com

https://slunik.slu.se/kursfiler/BI1228/30269.1415/Parrots_as_companion_animals.pdf

Manual of Parrot Behavior

This authoritative reference, the first of its kind, is a necessary addition to the library of any practitioner or behaviorist who sees avain companion animals. Because of their beauty, intelligence, playfulness and ability in mimicry, parrots are the most widely kept companion birds. It is...

books.google.com

Nature calls: intelligence and natural foraging style predict poor welfare in captive parrots | Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Understanding why some species thrive in captivity, while others struggle to adjust, can suggest new ways to improve animal care. Approximately half of all Psittaciformes, a highly threatened order, live in zoos, breeding centres and private homes. Here, ...

royalsocietypublishing.org

Stereotypies in caged parrots, schizophrenia and autism: evidence for a common mechanism

Spontaneously occurring abnormal behaviors in animals have recently received considerable attention, both in veterinary medicine and as a potential mo…

www.sciencedirect.com

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3184/175815513X13803574144572

Species differences in responses to captivity: stress, welfare and the comparative method

Approximately 26 billion animals, spanning over 10 000 species, are kept on farms and in zoos, conservation breeding centers, research laboratories an…

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[TechnoGeek]

I'm not going to doxx myself anymore to prove a point, and honestly I don't have anything to prove to you. I am who I am, and you can believe it or not. The fact that you're resorting to attacking me personally tells me all I need to know. You do you, keep on calling people names All I said is that I don't think "most" animals do well in captivity and provided reasons as to why, and you only have told me that parrots live longer in captivity and called me names. The fact that you also haven't addressed anything I said but just keep saying "its wrong" speaks volumes.

Here's a few sources to read at your leisure as to welfare concerns of parrots as companion animals and keeping them in captivity. Lifespan is moot when they are not doing great physically or mentally. I also never said I am a professional scientist, that's you putting words in my mouth. I studied wildlife and fisheries biology in college and work at zoos and animal rescues. Not that hard to believe, but hey, you keep on believing whatever you want. This'll be the last I respond to you, since clearly you don't have in interest in politeness or being civil. Hope you have a good day, buddy.

Oxidative stress, activity behaviour and body mass in captive parrots

Captive breeding programmes are common for many parrot species. We show that in small parrots kept in standard cages with ad libitum food, high weight gain was

academic.oup.com

https://slunik.slu.se/kursfiler/BI1228/30269.1415/Parrots_as_companion_animals.pdf

Manual of Parrot Behavior

This authoritative reference, the first of its kind, is a necessary addition to the library of any practitioner or behaviorist who sees avain companion animals. Because of their beauty, intelligence, playfulness and ability in mimicry, parrots are the most widely kept companion birds. It is...

books.google.com

Nature calls: intelligence and natural foraging style predict poor welfare in captive parrots | Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Understanding why some species thrive in captivity, while others struggle to adjust, can suggest new ways to improve animal care. Approximately half of all Psittaciformes, a highly threatened order, live in zoos, breeding centres and private homes. Here, ...

royalsocietypublishing.org

Stereotypies in caged parrots, schizophrenia and autism: evidence for a common mechanism

Spontaneously occurring abnormal behaviors in animals have recently received considerable attention, both in veterinary medicine and as a potential mo…

www.sciencedirect.com

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3184/175815513X13803574144572

Species differences in responses to captivity: stress, welfare and the comparative method

Approximately 26 billion animals, spanning over 10 000 species, are kept on farms and in zoos, conservation breeding centers, research laboratories an…

www.sciencedirect.com

From your own sources:

In humans, oxidative stress is linked with obesity, lack of exercise and poor nutrition, all of which are common in captive animals.

I started this off by saying if proper care was taken of the animal. If someone's idea of proper care is obesity, lack of exercise, and poor nutrition, they should not keep pets. Not all captive animals are like that, sorry.

2nd source:

Small captive population sizes predicted low hatch rates, potentially due to genetic bottlenecks, inbreeding and low availability of compatible mates.

How is inbreeding resulting in low hatch rates and poor genetics proof that animals do better in the wild? More importantly what did you expect? Yeah inbreeding is always an issue but you don't have to inbreed animals to keep them as pets, especially parrots because lots of parrots exist in captivity so there's a fairly sizeable gene pool.

Also inbreeding isn't an issue only for non-domesticated animals, it's an issue for domestic animals and even humans lol. Poor health and shorter lifespan is observed in showline dogs way more often than working stock for this very reason and reputable breeders go out of their way to avoid it. Why do you think domestic cattle breeders freeze and sell semen and buy semen from other farmers instead of breeding their own related animals??

Some people do it wrong, that's the case with everything, doesn't mean it has to be done that way. Actually this article that you listed is itself proof that it doesn't have to be done the wrong way and that we're investing time and money in identifying what makes life easier and better for captive animals:

Understanding why some species thrive in captivity, while others struggle to adjust, can suggest new ways to improve animal care.

Intelligent animals denied exercise and mental stimulation will suffer in captivity, that you're assuming it's the only way is a strong trend among anti pet people. Believe it or not some don't even want you to be able to keep cats or dogs.

All of your sources seem to follow this mentality:

Stereotypies are abnormal repetitive, unvarying, and functionless behaviors that are often performed by captive and domesticated animals housed in barren environments.

The source clearly says this isn't unique to exotic pets and it even happens to dogs and cats, little wonder since it clearly mentions the cause: barren environments. Do you think that because some people are keeping a German shepherd poorly that no one should be allowed to even if they're responsible owners??

I'm not gonna reply to the name calling part, I clearly said no disrespect meant several times in my post. Alligator tears don't work on me.

Please note I'm not saying that we should take animals out of the wild, nor that anyone should keep whatever they want to. I'm just saying that nature is much much much less caring about animals than a responsible keeper. I made my point clear from the first post: if proper care and attention are given to the animal. Yeah for some species most people don't have the means or the experience (and sometimes not even the dedication required) to keep them healthy and happy, but if and when that's different life in captivity is much easier.

By the way this is true for humans too! No matter what vegan soccer moms tell you about Paleo diets (which weren't even a thing and are a complete myth) life was much worse for humans before modern civilization, you would've been lucky to make it to 35.

 

[Marcostaco]

How do you guys stomach reading through these lol? Just looking at the titles make my skin crawl

 

[AphonopelmaTX]

Less than 15% of slings in the wild make it to adulthood. 97%+ do in captivity. I dare say we are giving babies a chance at life! Lol

Where did you get these figures? They sound made up.