Crum wrote:I agree with ash and grimace. Its your choice to hold them. Is there much of a difference between a pet lizard and a wild one? They both require the same care and food. Besides, I would find it more as a benefit to them because they don't have to work as hard and are safe from the elements. And if it has a disease, if you don't really care about getting sick or if you are very hygienic, whats the difference, I mean if it died in your care chances are it would die in the wild too. Sure it may cause them stress, but reptiles and amphibians tend not to remember much of anything. Plus how would it be different than taking a pet you bought and moving it to its new home or catching one? I care about animals and stuff, but come on guys, its not really a big deal.
First of all, a salamander is NOT a lizard. A salamander is an amphibian with a lizard-like appearance. Like frogs their skin plays a HUGE part in their survival, much bigger than the protective skin of lizards. Many amphibians rely on valerian respiration, or "breathing" via the skin. As a result any damage to the skin lowers gas exchange, and essentially they suffocate. Think of them as having their lungs on the outside of their body. Now, how would you feel in the same situation, where my bare hands are touching you lungs? My hands could have natural human oils, dirt, bacteria, or residual chemicals, such as from soap on them, which your lungs are not accustomed to having touch them, and thus they become inflamed and damaged, so you slowly suffocate over time. Not a nice picture is it? While visiting CRES labs (now the Institute for Conservation Research) I was shown live specimens afflicted with a fungus that is wiping out amphibian species right now. It causes them to be unable to breath via their skin, and it's just horrible to see them that way. Wild or captive, no experienced amphibian keeper will tell you to it's okay to handle amphibians like reptiles. They aren't "pets", they are display only.
I'll never understand the people like you that argue an unnatural and artificial habitat must be better than a natural habitat for an animal that was born in and lived it's life in the wild, because it's "protecting" the animal. Use common sense. If their natural habitat was so difficult for them to survive in, then they wouldn't be there. They evolved to handle it and thrive there. Yes, we still do keep pets like leos or beardies in captive enclosures. However, leos and beardies are very rarely wild caught, and if they are wild caught and sold to a pet store for resell, it's done very young, so they have a chance to adapt to a captive environment. Reptiles, in general, also tend to be a lot hardier than amphibians in general. You may or may not be interested in actually owning salamanders, but the above is still why everyone continues to say choose a captive bred, or long term captive as pet, rather than catching your own. This applies to all animals, not just reptiles and amphibians.
I've noticed you continue to say that reptiles and amphibians do not have good memory. Who told you this, because I guarantee you that reptiles and amphibians have much better memory than you think, and regardless that doesn't justify stressing them out if you can avoid it. Without the ability to learn, and retain knowledge/experiences their chance of survival goes way way waaaay down. Sure, it's a lot more primal and basic that mammalian memory, but it's still memory. The more basic thought processes of lower animals actually works against you, because why you pick up a salamander, it's not just a little stressed out, it thinks you are going to eat it. If you stick it in a box for a day or so, it's going to be in that extremely high stress level for that duration. How would you feel if someone grabbed you off the street and locked you in their house for a day? However, where does memory come in? I don't understand why you continue you say it? Is it like the people that say goldfish only have a 2 minute memory, so it's okay to cram them into a bowl? It's been proven false, and it's cruel for goldfish to stick them in bowls. If that's the justification you use, then why keep your leo in his set up? Hey, stick him in a shoe box, and put him under the bed or throw him outside to live in the wild. He'll be just fine, because obviously his bad memory will make him forget that he needs certain requirements to thrive. Sticking you leo in a shoebox or outside would stress it out, because
it's not use to it, and obviously a shoebox and your backyard lacks what is necessary for it to survive. Do you understand? Memory should not be a factor on the value of a living creature still capable of feeling pain and fear.
Thrive > survive. Taking wild animals from their natural environment, even for a day, is a big deal and I hope that one day you have the experience to understand that.
Ivalynfyre wrote:But people do keep them, and I disagree with that.
^ This. Regardless of whether you intend to keep them others do and your friends do. I already said it's not that big of a deal to just look at them. That doesn't cause them enough stress to be detrimental to there health, and there is nothing illegal about it. It's like bird watching. If you are touching them though, then it changes a lot, and if you are keeping them captive, even for a short period, then it changes even more.
