The term captivity

Vanisher

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
2,146
I have many time thinking of the term 'Tarantulas in captivety' I think it has a negative sound to it. For me the word captivety represent 'holding a animal against there will in a confined space' or a person in jail. I often say 'Tarantulas in terrarium' captivety is for me a term that should be used to describe wild animals that naturally lives and roams in large areas in the wild and put in cages. Animals that are tormented by being held in cages like tigers, bears and other wild animals taken from their natural habitats. Maybe captivety could be used for wildcaught tarantulas? But many tarantulas are breed in "captivety", and due to tarantulas lifestyles, i dont think wildcaught tarantulas are tormented in terrariums nearly as much as if you put a tiger in a cage? And another thing i wonder about, are we calling fishes in aquarium 'fishes in captivety'? Maybe we do? But as far as tarantulas go, i like to use the expression 'Tarantulas in terrarium' not 'Tarantulas in captivety'
 

FrDoc

Gen. 1:24-25
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
739
Agree, particularly with the idea that the natural life style of tarantulas is sedentary. The only exception to this is in the case of mature males when they endeavor to find a female. I will admit that I have a tendency to put my specimens in enclosures that are a bit on the large side, and the vast majority of those housed in that manner don’t even use the limited space provided. They stay in or around their hide or burrow all of the time. Some won’t even leave the spot to snag prey, but wait until it comes to them. If one speaks purely in the context of semantics, of course the term captivity applies, but the concept can be misleading.
 
Last edited:

Vanessa

Grammostola Groupie
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,950
The word captivity does not address treatment of the animals - it only addresses the state at which the animal resides and how it got there. We have captured our tarantulas, and we are keeping them confined for our purposes, so the word is correctly applied. We absolutely DO hold these animals, imprisoned, and against their will in our homes and, if they had the ability to, they would likely choose not to be there. Us liking the word, or it's connotation, doesn't make it any less accurate. Until tarantulas are walking up to our doors and moving into our homes by the hundreds, where they're native of course, then we can safely come to the conclusion that they want nothing to do with us. Sure, they might not roam hundreds of miles like elephants and eagles, but you better believe that they would walk away from their confinement, if given the opportunity, and it happens all the time.
Captive born and captive bred does not mean that the animals are domesticated. The vast majority of animals that we have in captivity do not meet the requirements for domestication and will forever be wild animals in captivity. Our tarantulas fall into that category, I'm afraid.
Unfortunately, the hobby itself is responsible for most of the negative perceptions that people have. You don't have to go any further than this forum, with it's endless dead and dying tarantula posts, to see why the hobby has a negative reputation with people concerned with animal welfare. The people who are keeping these animals to the best of our ability, providing the most appropriate conditions that we can, are not the people who are generating the spotlight on the hobby - the substandard yahoos claiming that they provide 'entertainment' are the ones who are representing this hobby to the world.
 
Last edited:

FrDoc

Gen. 1:24-25
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
739
The word captivity does not address treatment of the animals - it only addresses the state at which the animal resides and how it got there. We have captured our tarantulas, and we are keeping them confined for our purposes, so the word is correctly applied. We absolutely DO hold these animals, imprisoned, and against their will in our homes and, if they had the ability to, they would likely choose not to be there. Us liking the word, or it's connotation, doesn't make it any less accurate. Until tarantulas are walking up to our doors and moving into our homes by the hundreds, where they're native of course, then we can safely come to the conclusion that they want nothing to do with us. Sure, they might not roam hundreds of miles like elephants and eagles, but you better believe that they would walk away from their confinement, if given the opportunity, and it happens all the time.
Captive born and captive bred does not mean that the animals are domesticated. The vast majority of animals that we have in captivity do not meet the requirements for domestication and will forever be wild animals in captivity. Our tarantulas fall into that category, I'm afraid.
Unfortunately, the hobby itself is responsible for most of the negative perceptions that people have. You don't have to go any further than this forum, with it's endless dead and dying tarantula posts, to see why the hobby has a negative reputation with people concerned with animal welfare. The people who are keeping these animals to the best of our ability, providing the most appropriate conditions that we can, are not the people who are generating the spotlight on the hobby - the substandard yahoos claiming that they provide 'entertainment' are the ones who are representing this hobby to the world.
I don’t disagree with your main thesis. As I stated above, if one is going to deal strictly with semantics, “captivity“ does indeed apply. However, just as you argue for a strictly semantic definition of captivity, trying to use such words as “will” and “choose” in the context of spiders is inapplicable.
 

Vanisher

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
2,146
The word captivity does not address treatment of the animals - it only addresses the state at which the animal resides and how it got there. We have captured our tarantulas, and we are keeping them confined for our purposes, so the word is correctly applied. We absolutely DO hold these animals, imprisoned, and against their will in our homes and, if they had the ability to, they would likely choose not to be there. Us liking the word, or it's connotation, doesn't make it any less accurate. Until tarantulas are walking up to our doors and moving into our homes by the hundreds, where they're native of course, then we can safely come to the conclusion that they want nothing to do with us. Sure, they might not roam hundreds of miles like elephants and eagles, but you better believe that they would walk away from their confinement, if given the opportunity, and it happens all the time.
Captive born and captive bred does not mean that the animals are domesticated. The vast majority of animals that we have in captivity do not meet the requirements for domestication and will forever be wild animals in captivity. Our tarantulas fall into that category, I'm afraid.
Unfortunately, the hobby itself is responsible for most of the negative perceptions that people have. You don't have to go any further than this forum, with it's endless dead and dying tarantula posts, to see why the hobby has a negative reputation with people concerned with animal welfare. The people who are keeping these animals to the best of our ability, providing the most appropriate conditions that we can, are not the people who are generating the spotlight on the hobby - the substandard yahoos claiming that they provide 'entertainment' are the ones who are representing this hobby to the world.
But tarantulas have gaglions, a very primitive brain. And i dont think they "rather choose" to be out in the wild? Because they dont have intelligens in that sense that they feel bad to be in a glassterrarium. They are animal based on instinct. A tiger can be depressed over beeing in a small cage. I dont spiders feel any of this? This is what i mean by i dont like the term captivety
 

Vanessa

Grammostola Groupie
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,950
I don’t disagree with your main thesis. As I stated above, if one is going to deal strictly with semantics, “captivity“ does indeed apply. However, just as you argue for a strictly semantic definition of captivity, trying to use such words as “will” and “choose” in the context of spiders is inapplicable.
They are absolutely able to choose - in the context of taking one option versus another option. You can argue that what is driving their choice is different to our driven by logic version, but it is still a choice nonetheless.
Just open the lid of all your enclosures and see what they very much 'choose' to do. The fact that the vast majority of your spiders would, guaranteed, leave the confines of their enclosures, tells me that they are very well aware that they are being held in captivity and that is not something that they feel is in their best interest. It doesn't matter whether that is instinct or logic driven.
Only when you domesticate an animal do they start to choose to stay, even it if isn't in their best interests, as opposed to fleeing. That is when it stops being a case of an animal being held against their will.
 

Polenth

Arachnoknight
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Messages
274
I have many time thinking of the term 'Tarantulas in captivety' I think it has a negative sound to it. For me the word captivety represent 'holding a animal against there will in a confined space' or a person in jail. I often say 'Tarantulas in terrarium' captivety is for me a term that should be used to describe wild animals that naturally lives and roams in large areas in the wild and put in cages. Animals that are tormented by being held in cages like tigers, bears and other wild animals taken from their natural habitats. Maybe captivety could be used for wildcaught tarantulas? But many tarantulas are breed in "captivety", and due to tarantulas lifestyles, i dont think wildcaught tarantulas are tormented in terrariums nearly as much as if you put a tiger in a cage? And another thing i wonder about, are we calling fishes in aquarium 'fishes in captivety'? Maybe we do? But as far as tarantulas go, i like to use the expression 'Tarantulas in terrarium' not 'Tarantulas in captivety'
It's common for fish to say that a species lives a certain number of years in captivity or has/hasn't been known to breed in captivity. It'd be misleading to say something like fish in tanks, because fish can also be kept in ponds, streams and so on. It makes it seem like the enclosure choice is what's important, whereas it's really about whether the animal is wild or not.

The same goes for tarantulas, because the important thing is not that the tarantula is in a terrarium as opposed to an old shoe box... it's whether the tarantula is wild or not.

In other contexts, it'd be a bit odd to use that word, but I don't really see people doing that for tarantulas. They tend to say they have a pet tarantula or they're keeping a tarantula. Not that they have a tarantula in captivity. So people are already using other terms for casual chat about their tarantulas.

All the other stuff about ethical treatment, choice, and whether different animals can reason it out... none of that changes whether an animal is living in the wild or living in captivity. It's not what that distinction is talking about.
 

Patherophis

Arachnobaron
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
360
I quite like term i have seen being used by one institution, they replaced "in captivity" with "in human care".
 

Mike R

Arachnopeon
Joined
Dec 23, 2019
Messages
2
So far as the term captive, I don't think the word inherently has negative connotations – it’s all about the context in which it’s used. Cheetahs protected in a nature preserve are captive, however I wouldn’t imagine they’re unhappy about it.

For me, the context of whether captivity is a positive (or neutral) vs. negative is based on how we can deduce or imagine the subject feeling about its captivity. In the case of spiders, I would imagine they’re generally pretty content (content in their spidery way at least). The fact that they’ll choose to wander out of their enclosures if left open doesn’t necessarily mean they want (or can even conceptualize) freedom. Granted I’m just unscientifically conjecturing but I would imagine it just means they’ll wander off to hunt or explore for new living areas wherever they can wander off to – encountering a barrier 20 centimeters away vs. a kilometer away doesn’t make any difference to them – they’re still just wandering.
 

Feral

Arachnobaron
Active Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
408
Maybe ask why one would search for a synonym for "captivity" in the first place? The word itself has no connotations or subtext, negative or otherwise, it literally just denotes a being is confined or kept. But individuals can always attach their own associations, experiences, and beliefs on to it. Or confuse it as a synonym for imprisonment. But that's all baggage hung on an innocent, neutral word. If a person or institution feels the need to euphamize it, to soften its intended meaning and re-brand it, or even if it has actually grown to acquire a negative connotation in popular culture, then maybe the actual problem is not the word itself or any perceived need for a 'better' word, but instead our deeper feelings about the realities of captivity in practice and its ethics.

On a psychological level, humans nearly always euphamize things they're ashamed of, but also are often consciously unaware of what they're doing, why they're doing it, or that they are even ashamed of it in the first place.

So far as the term captive, I don't think the word inherently has negative connotations – it’s all about the context in which it’s used. Cheetahs protected in a nature preserve are captive, however I wouldn’t imagine they’re unhappy about it.

For me, the context of whether captivity is a positive (or neutral) vs. negative is based on how we can deduce or imagine the subject feeling about its captivity. In the case of spiders, I would imagine they’re generally pretty content (content in their spidery way at least). The fact that they’ll choose to wander out of their enclosures if left open doesn’t necessarily mean they want (or can even conceptualize) freedom. Granted I’m just unscientifically conjecturing but I would imagine it just means they’ll wander off to hunt or explore for new living areas wherever they can wander off to – encountering a barrier 20 centimeters away vs. a kilometer away doesn’t make any difference to them – they’re still just wandering.
It's been brought up by others, but just to use Mike's post as an example...
It bugs me when tarantulas/inverts are seen and/or treated as little mindless drones. In an effort to avoid anthropomorphizing (which is good, avoid that), I think the hobby has swung way too far in the other direction and now tends to over-compensate by treating them like veritable robots. Sometimes we're not giving them the credit they actually deserve. The absolutely make choices and decisions, they feel stress and pain, they are capable of memory and many different types of learning, and we're continually discovering even more things they can do.

For example, in the situation brought up of "choice" in a tarantula leaving an enclosure- tarantulas can determine if their current surroundings are suitable enough to stay or if they are unsuitable enough to leave and look for a new place. They may or may not be able to conceptualize "freedom", science hasn't proven or disproven that (though I'd think it's doubtful), but they don't need to understand abstractions in order to decide their current situation is bad enough to try for better. We don't need science to prove they're capable of that (though they have), we can see it with our own eyes- If we placed a tarantula on the floor the middle of room, does she stay right where we put her forever like "Well this is where I live now", or does she go searching for a suitable place to call home? If her burrow floods, does she just stand there like "Well now I have a new swimming pool but no home... so I guess I'll just stand here til I die" or does she go off looking for a new house? Those are obvious examples, but we see it more subtly, too. Like my last rehouse, I gave three options for hides, and he didn't just stay in the first one he visited, he inspected all three before deciding on the one he favored most for whatever spood reasons spoods have. Of course Ts can see when a situation isn't up to thier standards and can choose to go look for a better situation! They would've gone extinct right quick otherwise.

Tarantulas/inverts have been proven to have good spatial memory and be capable of spatial learning. This is how they remember where thier water dish is, for example, or how to get back to their burrow (especially if they're suddenly startled). They've even done studies with tarantulas in complex mazes. So they can absolutely tell where they are in relation to other things, have a memory of where they've been, and are not just haplessly wandering around. Even besides thier spatial memory, they can pick up sense clues (like hormones in silk, for one) to tell whose been in the area (including their own past visits) and can get a sense of the size of an enclosure by clues from a certain type of nerve at the base of the seta that senses movement of the seta by airflow, and just by that one sense alone can tell if they're in a enclosed space or out in the open. So, with all those tools and more, yes, they would notice the difference of barrier at 20cm or a kilometer away, yes.

Besides spatial learning and complex maze learning, inverts have also been shown to be capable of other types of learning- assotiative, avoidant, habituative, reversal, etc. I'm all for avoiding anthropomorphizing, totally, but I also think mistakenly doing the opposite, devaluing and objectifying them, can be just as harmful.
They really can do more than what I'm seeing many hobbyist's give them credit for.

Science is not yet sure whether they can experience any kind of emotion. But stress is not an emotion, and inverts can absolutely experience stress. Stress from whatever cause, from inappropriate husbandry to an inability to fulfill instincts, can have detrimental physiological effects and mental/behavioral effects. Sadly, these stresses can often go unrecognized due to hobbyist's lack of knowledge and inverts' stoic (to humans) nature. Since inverts are so alien to humans in every way, from behaviorally to biologically, we seem to have a hard time understanding them as they actually are, and not how we imagine them to be or want them to be. But I think, challenging as it is, understanding them as they are is a great tool for effective conservation in the wild the only path to humane captive care.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vanisher

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
2,146
They are absolutely able to choose - in the context of taking one option versus another option. You can argue that what is driving their choice is different to our driven by logic version, but it is still a choice nonetheless.
Just open the lid of all your enclosures and see what they very much 'choose' to do. The fact that the vast majority of your spiders would, guaranteed, leave the confines of their enclosures, tells me that they are very well aware that they are being held in captivity and that is not something that they feel is in their best interest. It doesn't matter whether that is instinct or logic driven.
Only when you domesticate an animal do they start to choose to stay, even it if isn't in their best interests, as opposed to fleeing. That is when it stops being a case of an animal being held against their will.
I dont agree. Lets say you have a 12×12 inch tank. And it the right condition for the tarantula. Than you take a piece of the wild with exactly the same conditions. We pretend that it is possible to create the exact same conditions in the 12 inch terrarium. I dont think the spider rather choose the piece if wild instead of the enclosure. My belief is that it absolutely doesnt matter for tge tarantula, because the conditions are exactly the same
If a tarantula female has her burrow in the right enviroments with the right conditions.in a terrarium, it is the important thing. They have no wish to wonder out and wish they can pass the glasswalls of the enclosure cos they feel "I really want to go there" When they lack the right spit to dig the burrow they will pace, nomatter if it is in a terrarium or in the wild. One thing to mention is that in the wild the conditions are always better in a terrarium because of many things like depth of the substrate, type of substrate and overall microclimate. But a tarantula dont feel trapped or depressed of the confined space per say, It is IF the conditions are disliked by the spider. It is not because it has glasswalls around itself, and wants to escape cos it have anxiety of being trapped!
If they have to choose between a terrarium with a perfect place for them to dig a burrow, enough substrate, right moisture level, perfect condition ect VS a large piece of nature with littke less perfect conditions than in the much smaller terrarium, i am sure they are gonna choose the enclosure!

If you compare this to say a tiger ot a monkey in a small cage with perfect enviroment and they can choose thus to the wild with exactly the same enviroment, i am sure they choose the wild. Another thing is intelligens. Both those animals are much more intelligent than a tarantula and they can feel depressed, anxiety, and sadness of being traot in a cage instead of being out in the wild. Tarantulas cant feel those emotions. They can just feel stressed if the conditions are wrong, ni matter if they are in a terrarium or in the wild, with the exeptions of being in the wild they can wonder until they find the right spot and conditions

And all members here are always talking about that handling is just for the owner itself, nit for the tarantulas. This is mainly part of what i am talking about above. This is also one of the reasons that tarantulas dont have any wish and longing of being petted or handled like a monkey or a tiger, a cat or a dog. To feel depression of feeling trapped of the caging itself, the animal must have another type of intelligens, not just being a animal that behaves on instinct

I may be wrong, i am no arachnologist, but this is my firm believe!
 
Last edited:

spideyspinneret78

Arachnopeon
Active Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
34
In reality, I think it's all about the connotation that people assign the word. Many zoos, etc. are now using the term "managed care" instead as a euphemism. In the past, it was perfectly acceptable to use, but now in an age of heightened political sensitivity that's changing. The connotation of words are different for different individuals and definitely do change over time, especially in regard to sensitive topics nowadays. People also tend to forget that life in the wild for many animals, including tarantulas, can be extremely harsh. Parasites, starvation, predation, etc. Spiders, insects, and other animals with very basic needs tend to thrive in captivity where they are protected from these hardships. In contrast, I personally believe that animals with very complex social needs and high intelligence may suffer in captivity because those needs can be nearly impossible to meet. Then there's the issue of conservation. Take pokies as an example. Their main threat is habitat destruction. It's sadly possible that in a few years, the only pokies left may indeed be the ones in captivity. Without captive breeding and conservation, many species would already be extinct. I don't think that tarantulas, if cared for correctly, are "suffering" in captivity because they have very basic needs that are being met if well cared for. Wild caught tarantulas- possibly, because they may adapt poorly to a new environment. And of course capturing tarantulas from the wild can decimate local populations.
 

Mike R

Arachnopeon
Joined
Dec 23, 2019
Messages
2
Just wanted to clarify a few things as I think I may not have communicated what I meant as well as I had wanted:

It's been brought up by others, but just to use Mike's post as an example...
It bugs me when tarantulas/inverts are seen and/or treated as little mindless drones. In an effort to avoid anthropomorphizing (which is good, avoid that), I think the hobby has swung way too far in the other direction and now tends to over-compensate by treating them like veritable robots. Sometimes we're not giving them the credit they actually deserve. The absolutely make choices and decisions, they feel stress and pain, they are capable of memory and many different types of learning, and we're continually discovering even more things they can do.
I wasn't intending to imply I thought they were robots or had no motives or wants, only that most of the elements we view as the negatives of 'captivity' aren't necessarily things a spider cares about or even realize exists in their situation. For all I know my Ts don't know I'm forcing them to live in their enclosures, they just think they found a nice spot to live and have no idea they're 'captive'. I would at least imagine they can't understand our role as their caretakers given how bitey some of them can behave.

For example, in the situation brought up of "choice" in a tarantula leaving an enclosure- tarantulas can determine if their current surroundings are suitable enough to stay or if they are unsuitable enough to leave and look for a new place. They may or may not be able to conceptualize "freedom", science hasn't proven or disproven that (though I'd think it's doubtful), but they don't need to understand abstractions in order to decide their current situation is bad enough to try for better. We don't need science to prove they're capable of that (though they have), we can see it with our own eyes- If we placed a tarantula on the floor the middle of room, does she stay right where we put her forever like "Well this is where I live now", or does she go searching for a suitable place to call home? If her burrow floods, does she just stand there like "Well now I have a new swimming pool but no home... so I guess I'll just stand here til I die" or does she go off looking for a new house? Those are obvious examples, but we see it more subtly, too. Like my last rehouse, I gave three options for hides, and he didn't just stay in the first one he visited, he inspected all three before deciding on the one he favored most for whatever spood reasons spoods have. Of course Ts can see when a situation isn't up to thier standards and can choose to go look for a better situation! They would've gone extinct right quick otherwise.
In regards to them choosing to leave their enclosures when left open I was presuming a hypothetical situation where their enclosure was acceptable to them and there was no quality of life 'need' to leave. I only meant that leaving their enclosure, absent other evidence, doesn't have to mean they weren't content where they were.

... So, with all those tools and more, yes, they would notice the difference of barrier at 20cm or a kilometer away, yes.
I wasn't referring to their ability to tell the physical difference between the 2 distances, merely that the difference between the 2 doesn't necessarily have an impact on the animal's happiness. As an example, I have 2 indoor cats (the best cats - totally unbiased). Obviously they know the difference between the physical space in my apartment vs. outside, however the fact that I don't allow them to face the horror that is 'outside' doesn't cause them any stress - they're perfectly happy. That being said, if my door was left open for an extended period of time they may wander out - not because they were unhappy, just because that's what a lot of living things do.
 

Vanessa

Grammostola Groupie
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,950
I may be wrong, i am no arachnologist, but this is my firm believe!
Feel free to test your theory, then. Set your tarantulas up the way you feel is ideal conditions and then leave all the lids open. By your reasoning, they should stay put.
At no point did I make any claims that they are as intelligent as mammals, birds, etc., - quite the contrary if you read any and all of my posts on this forum relating to what tarantulas like, feel, remember, or any of the other theories that people have about their interactions with these animals.
However, they very much CAN make a choice based upon their instinct to survive. Do you think that they are fleeing the fires in Australia, or staying put to burn alive? Do you think that they flee flooding in Venezuela, or stay put and drown? Do you think that they might relocate their homes if food is in short supply, or stay put and starve? Those are all choices and, if they didn't make the right ones to ensure their survival, then they would be extinct by now.
They don't know that they are in a place that has no predators, that has unlimited access to all the food and water that they will ever require, and that provides them with the ideal overall conditions for survival. They don't know that - no animal in captivity grasps that. So, I don't even understand why you're bringing that up when that doesn't even factor in. In one part of your explanation you say that is a factor, that they should remain because all those things are provided to them, but then in another you claim that they can't make those rational decisions. I can guarantee you that they have no idea that there are no predators and they are currently in a situation that ensures that they survive the fullest of their natural lifespan.
If the term bothers people that much, that they have to look at coming up with euphemisms for it, then maybe those people should spend more time exploring why they are objecting to it. It is what it is - we keep wild animals captive in boxes in our homes that would otherwise not be there unless we confined them. You either accept that, or consider not keeping them.
 

Vanisher

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
2,146
Feel free to test your theory, then. Set your tarantulas up the way you feel is ideal conditions and then leave all the lids open. By your reasoning, they should stay put.
At no point did I make any claims that they are as intelligent as mammals, birds, etc., - quite the contrary if you read any and all of my posts on this forum relating to what tarantulas like, feel, remember, or any of the other theories that people have about their interactions with these animals.
However, they very much CAN make a choice based upon their instinct to survive. Do you think that they are fleeing the fires in Australia, or staying put to burn alive? Do you think that they flee flooding in Venezuela, or stay put and drown? Do you think that they might relocate their homes if food is in short supply, or stay put and starve? Those are all choices and, if they didn't make the right ones to ensure their survival, then they would be extinct by now.
They don't know that they are in a place that has no predators, that has unlimited access to all the food and water that they will ever require, and that provides them with the ideal overall conditions for survival. They don't know that - no animal in captivity grasps that. So, I don't even understand why you're bringing that up when that doesn't even factor in. In one part of your explanation you say that is a factor, that they should remain because all those things are provided to them, but then in another you claim that they can't make those rational decisions. I can guarantee you that they have no idea that there are no predators and they are currently in a situation that ensures that they survive the fullest of their natural lifespan.
If the term bothers people that much, that they have to look at coming up with euphemisms for it, then maybe those people should spend more time exploring why they are objecting to it. It is what it is - we keep wild animals captive in boxes in our homes that would otherwise not be there unless we confined them. You either accept that, or consider not keeping them.
Ofcourse they do all this, fleeing fires, flooding and so on because they are instinctive animals. But the question wasnt that. It was if they becoming depressed of being inside an enclosure in the same ways that mammals do
I say they dont!

About you say" leave the enclosure open" I have! i have many tarantulas that i forgot to close the lid for many hours and they stay put. And fossorials stays in there burrows for month withiut even getting outside. If your theory is right, every tarantula would spend most of their time trying to push up the lid. A tarantula that is doing so is probably set up wrong. They are not happy with the set up. Again, The condition is not good for them and therefor they are trying to escape. They are not trying to escape because they feel depressed to be inside 4 walls

No reason for you to get defenssive with me!
 
Last edited:

Vanessa

Grammostola Groupie
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,950
Ofcourse they do all this, fleeing fires, flooding and so on because they are instinctive animals. But the question wasnt that. It was if they becoming depressed of being inside an enclosure in the same ways that mammals do
I say they dont!
No reason for you to get defenssive with me!
You're the one who brought up torment and depression and incorrectly made it synonymous with the term 'captivity'. If those are things that you associate with a word that doesn't mean that, then it isn't the word that is the problem.
 

Vanisher

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
2,146
You're the one who brought up torment and depression and incorrectly made it synonymous with the term 'captivity'. If those are things that you associate with a word that doesn't mean that, then it isn't the word that is the problem.
I added some more on my post, read that
 

FrDoc

Gen. 1:24-25
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
739
They are absolutely able to choose - in the context of taking one option versus another option. You can argue that what is driving their choice is different to our driven by logic version, but it is still a choice nonetheless.
Just open the lid of all your enclosures and see what they very much 'choose' to do. The fact that the vast majority of your spiders would, guaranteed, leave the confines of their enclosures, tells me that they are very well aware that they are being held in captivity and that is not something that they feel is in their best interest. It doesn't matter whether that is instinct or logic driven.
Only when you domesticate an animal do they start to choose to stay, even it if isn't in their best interests, as opposed to fleeing. That is when it stops being a case of an animal being held against their will.
They “choose” nothing. They just do. It’s like saying a vine chooses to, or is aware of climbing a wall or trellis. You may have the last word. This is becoming one of those subjective, visceral agree to disagree threads, like naming spiders, which I’m aware that you do and I don’t. At the end of the day, nobody’s changing anyone’s mind.
 
Last edited:

Vanessa

Grammostola Groupie
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,950
They “choose” nothing. They just do. It’s like saying a vine chooses to, or is aware of climbing a wall or trellis. You may have the last word. This is becoming one of those subjective, visceral agree to disagree threads, like naming spiders, which I’m aware that you do and I don’t. At the end of the day, nobody’s changing anyone’s mind.
So, you think they're on par with plants? Well, you're definitely not going to win any arguments with that theory. You're one of those anti-vegan plants have feelings too people, aren't you?
And, what does naming them have anything to do with anything? You are really so triggered by that, aren't you? The way you go on and on and on about it, bringing it up at every opportunity that you possibly can, you must lose sleep over it.
When I claim that they recognize their names, or that my car and boat recognize their names for that matter, you might have a leg to stand on, but until then you just come off as being obsessed about something that has absolutely zero relevance to your life.
 

Feral

Arachnobaron
Active Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
408
They “choose” nothing. They just do. It’s like saying a vine chooses to, or is aware of climbing a wall or trellis. You may have the last word. This is becoming one of those agree to disagree threads.
I've already stated that they can, in fact, make choices. If you're going to disagree with established science, where is your evidence? But even aside from your lack of proof, you're saying that an animal who has been proven to be capable of a number of different types of learning... including Complex Maze learning, as stated above... can't even make a simple choice and has no awareness of its actions? That is entirely illogical.

But if you need proof that I don't just randomly make stuff up, here:
http://britishspiders.org.uk/bulletin/120401.pdf
I mentioned in my previous post that arachnids are capable of Complex Maze learning, among other types.
The study linked above (from eighteen years ago!) involved Aphonopelma hentzi that established tarantulas' ability in three different types of learning- Spatial, Reversal, and Complex Maze learning. (Associative, Habituative, and Aversive learning types were established in arachnids in separate studies. And those are just the types of learning in arachnids that I remember reading studies on recently, they may have been proven to be capable of more that I either missed or have forgotten.)
Just to be clear, Complex Maze type of learning illustrates, by design, an animal's ability to make choices.
"Do I go left or right? Which one will take me to my goal?"
You can't learn how to navigate mazes successfully without being able to make choices and have an awareness of your actions, it's absolutely essential to success.

So yes, it's been scientifically proven and we've known for years that tarantulas can make choices and have awareness of their actions.
 
Last edited:
Top