Should Non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species

[Bill S]

im sorry. what is one in the same?

I think he meant "one and the same" - in other words, being smart and knowledgeable equals being mature and responsible. And to some extent, I'd agree. There's a lot of people who are classified as adults only because of the date on their birth certificates. Being over 21 does not guarantee knowledge, smarts, maturity or responsibility. Lots of proof of that running around out there.

 

[GrammatonCleric]

I'm 32 and I don't feel comfortable having the superfast hot OW's. Age is irrelavent to experience in this category IMO.

 

[AphonopelmaTX]

Well sure minors should be allowed to own species of tarantula from countries other than the Americas. I can't believe this would even be debatable for a few reasons. Tarantula venom, in general, only makes one very, very ill. We're not talking about species of spider which are well known to the general public to be dangerous. Maturity level and experience level is very subjective and no one person or group of people should judge another's ability to maintain highly defensive species of tarantula based on age. It's better worth the time to debate and discuss the ease to obtain deadly snakes and how those hobbyists who keep them put a strain on the nation's supply of antivenom. Any level headed parent would know to keep a child away from any potentially dangerous animal, venomous or not, and the parent will know at what age would be appropriate for the child to work with any type of spider.

It's odd to me that folks who frequent these boards almost tend to demonize tarantulas from certain areas of the world. Sure, their some species' venom potency is more potent than those from the Americas but some forget to realize how rare bites are and when they do occur, it seems the circumstances surrounding that bite is ignored. Somehow I doubt a few isolated instances of a child being hospitalized for an accidental tarantula bite would catch the attention of law makers and jeopardize the tarantula hobby. They're just not well understood.

Oh and by the way, the question for this poll is very narrow in scope and doesn't take into consideration that there are new world species of tarantula that are just as defensive and "dangerous" as old world species. I got the pleasure to work with a 7 inch mature male T. blondi that would embarrass any 5 inch Haplopelma lividum or adult Poecilotheria sp.

- Lonnie

 

[D-back]

Hi,
I voted for yes. I think, non-adults should have an OW T, but only if their parents think he's ready... Some kids are mentally matured to take care of a "dangerous" animal and some aren't. Some kids are over 200lbs, some are under 60. Some have serious illnesses, some don't. It's very individual. The parents have to consider these things, do their research about T's and then decide if their child is prepaird...
PS. I can imagine that a bite from a Poecilotheria or a Stromatopelma could cause serous problems for a kid who's for example 55-60lbs. I don't think that a coma for example is probable, but in my opinion we can't rule out the possibility. It's improbable, but if happens, in my state, the parent is going to the jail!!!!!! I don't know the US law, but in my country, the parents are responsible for their kids. By law, they HAVE TO protect them....if they allow their kids to bring a "dangerous" animal to the house, and something happens, they are responsible. They broke the law....

 

[T-Harry]

T's are not dangerous animals as unfortunatelly some people might think they are.
Lots of people who don't really know about T's told me that they thougt a T could kill a human before I explained them otherwise. I like to tell them, that dogs are dangerous animals, not T's. Haven't you heard on the local news once in a while that a dog killed a kid? Have you ever heard something comparable of a T? No? And you still think dogs are cuddly pets and T's are monsters?

So I voted "yes".

 

[D-back]

T's are not dangerous animals as unfortunatelly some people might think they are.
Lots of people who don't really know about T's told me that they thougt a T could kill a human before I explained them otherwise. I like to tell them, that dogs are dangerous animals, not T's. Haven't you heard on the local news once in a while that a dog killed a kid? Have you ever heard something comparable of a T? No? And you still think dogs are cuddly pets and T's are monsters?

So I voted "yes".

You have a very good point with the dogs. I used to say, that keeping a T is less dangerous than play soccer... ....But unfortunately the vast majority of the people perceive T's as dangerous animals and it's hard to convince them.... (my personal experience).......The parents have to decide, if the kid is ready for an OW T...And they also have to decide if they take the risk of buying a big dog with temperament while they have a small child at home.....

 

[cmart822331]

I think he meant "one and the same" - in other words, being smart and knowledgeable equals being mature and responsible. And to some extent, I'd agree. There's a lot of people who are classified as adults only because of the date on their birth certificates. Being over 21 does not guarantee knowledge, smarts, maturity or responsibility. Lots of proof of that running around out there.

i dont know, im sure there a are people out there that are smart and knowledgeable about T's... know everything there is to know about them but are just immature and irresponsible about owning them. regardless of age!

 

[vvx]

If it were to be written as a law by politicians what would they use to divide the allowed species from the disallowed species? My guess is they would disallow "venomous" pets. Not just pets that have a venom beyond some measurable number.

To my knowledge no tarantula is fatal. It might hurt a bit (a lot?) but won't do permanent harm.

So to me, I'd say the kids should be allowed to have the spider. However, and just like any other pet, they should have parental/guardian permission. I wouldn't want my kid coming home with a kitten anymore than another pet.

The ultimate reason is not the harm in my eyes but rather the responsibility and financial ability to care for those pets.

Now, should kids be allowed to have lethal pets? I don't know.

 

[Bill S]

If it were to be written as a law by politicians what would they use to divide the allowed species from the disallowed species? My guess is they would disallow "venomous" pets. Not just pets that have a venom beyond some measurable number.

Very good point. There are plenty of bad laws out there that came from good intent. If the people here on this forum can't come to a general consensus despite having overall more understanding and awareness of tarantulas, think what a botched job politicians could make of writing a set of policies about who can or cannot keep tarantulas.

 

[Endagr8]

That depends.........Is maturity relative?..........OF COURSE IT IS.

 

[burmish101]

I didnt read this whole thread but ill put in my 2 cents. Tarantulas arent exactly lethal. When I was 16 I was nailed by a 2in. juvie H. maculata, and believe me when I say this, that bite made me learn FAST and taught me to not get comfortable and gave me a higher respect of t's. If you play with fire your bound to get burned one way or another. Personally I learn from making mistakes as im the only person I know in my area that keeps this kind of stuff, so I have to teach myself as I go along, this is a small hobby afterall. I'm all for minors of sound mind owning t's as long as theyre doing it for the right reasons. I believe it should be up to the parents to judge how mature and responsible their children are. I wouldnt trust small children with possibly medically significant species though, ie. pokies, Stromatopelma ect.

 

[Exo]

I vote "no", I've seen what an adult H.mac can do to a full grown man, so there's no way I'd let anyone under 18 keep an OW.

 

[jbm150]

I vote "no", I've seen what an adult H.mac can do to a full grown man, so there's no way I'd let anyone under 18 keep an OW.

Really? What'd it do? I've heard burmish's story but its hard to find juicy bite reports from H. macs. Most I've read are pretty mild

 

[Exo]

Really? What'd it do? I've heard burmish's story but its hard to find juicy bite reports from H. macs. Most I've read are pretty mild

His heart rate was all over the place, he was vomiting, he was having trouble breathing, his vision was blurry, and he had spasms on the left side of his body. (He was bitten on his left hand)

He was in the hospital for two days, and he had trouble using his left arm for a week afterwards. Man, it was bad.

 

[Clement]

i really thinks it depend on the person, i had some OW when i was 16 years old and didnt have any problems, so if i can do it, other peaple can keep them even if they are under 18.

 

[The Spider Faery]

Arguably, pet dogs can be capable of inflicting more serious harm and minor injuries than a spider and there are more reports of injuries suffered from dogs than from pet spiders, often times, so should say a 17 year old who is living on their own, be denied the right to own a dog? However, dogs tend to reason and have intelligence as far as how they communicate before an attack, whereas an OW spider might bite without warning or signal since they won't flick hairs first, etc, so I think the margin for an accidental bite is more to be feared by an OW spider than a dog, but I'm just throwing the dog comparison out there for the sake of discussion. IMO, children shouldn't be allowed to own an OW T. If I had a child, I wouldn't allow my kid to keep one in his or her room, and if I owned one of the medically significant venomous OW T's and also had children in the house, there would be a strick 'hands off' rule and possibly a locked door to keep them out if necessary. I think of 16-18 year olds as 'young adults' so I'd vote 'Maybe' for that age category, but as far as a child under that age, I'd say 'No'.

 

[jbm150]

Geez, that is bad! Did he ever have any symptoms well after the bite? Like months later?


I haven't read this beast of a thread and I'm sure a lot of it is off-topic bickering but as for the original question, well, there are plenty of kids out there that are more than capable of taking care of them safely. Just as I'm sure there are that can take care of venomous snakes. And there are more than plenty that can't/won't. There are hot scorps, centipedes, and trues and these are restricted to minors. The way I understand it, there are no hot Ts and the best a seller can do is set their own personal restrictions or warn and educate the buyer. A seller should cover their bases and have a procedure in place for selling to minors that gets parental signatures. A seller that is lazy and passes them off to just anybody to make a sell deserves any repercussions that may come. Until there is a standard, yeah, minors should be allowed to own OWs as long as there is shared responsibilities (seller, minor, parents).

 

[Exo]

Geez, that is bad! Did he ever have any symptoms well after the bite? Like months later?

He had a "tingling" sensation (like his hand was asleep) on and off for about a month after the bite, but all other symptoms were gone after a week.

 

[whitewolf]

I'm gonna say maybe only because I know some adults who shouldn't own them and some kids on here who do one heck of a god job with them. More the person them self for me.

 

[Richard McJimsey]

Absolutely yes.
Age != maturity.
Granted, sometimes it does, but there are several underage persons on this forum that keep OW species, and hot species (myself included), and sometimes they are much more responsible and mature with them than several adults. I have also noticed that the majority of incidents (bites, stings etc) have occurred in adults, not in younger persons. Limitations of what can/cannot be purchased by an individual should be regulated by the experiance level of the person, and if any past incidents have occurred.
Granted it would be alot more work for sellers, but it could possibley make the hobby much better for us, and for future generations.

I stand by this, a year later.