THE LEADER (Surrey, British Columbia) 15 August 03 Wanna iguana? Try Rover instead
Do you dream of seeing eye-to-eye with a spectacled caiman? Cuddling a corn snake? Or playing fetch with a fat-tailed gecko?
I wouldn't be surprised. After all, this is a culture that views small dogs as handbag-like accessories (or conversely, accessories for handbags) and has humanized every creature from lobsters (Sebastian in the Little Mermaid) to lions (e.g. Simba, also of Disney fame).
Witness the saga of Tina the elephant, whose 3,500-kilometre journey from an Aldergrove zoo to a sanctuary in Tennessee has dominated media and held the masses rapt with tales from the road: the rhythm of her breathing during sleep and the meeting of "friends" at her new home.
Certainly, we have a duty to ensure Tina is cared for properly, considering we removed her from the wild for our "enjoyment." Years in captivity have saddled the Asian elephant with a painful foot condition and a neurotic habit of non-stop head-bobbing.
But do we learn from such mistakes? Apparently not.
At the Rainforest Reptile Refuge Society in South Surrey, there are hundreds of animals - including reptiles, lizards, frogs, spiders and snakes - that have been abused and/or abandoned by their "owners."
More than 60 red-eared slider turtles reside on-site. The creatures are often found dumped in local wetlands - only to die come winter - by those disillusioned with their long-living and rather boring pets.
With their fragile skins (amphibians are particularly sensitive to pollutants in their environments) and need for specific habitats, exotic animals such as those found at the Refuge should never become fixtures in our homes in the first place.
They can never be "a part of the family" like Rover or Kitty, which have been domesticated for centuries and have evolved to both depend upon and crave human companionship.
Not so, the spectacled caiman (crocodile), which is often taken from its mother in egg form and sold as a baby on the global pet market.
Or the green tree frog, which in nature gathers on branches with hundreds of its own kind, but in captivity, languishes alone in a container.
Or the Burmese python, which can reach lengths of 27 feet, and has, on occasion, attacked and killed its human captors.
It is this possible threat to personal safety that Surrey council (the majority re-elected, after all, on a get-tough-on-crime platform) is using as the reason for a bylaw that would ban the sale of exotic animals.
This is a welcome move, but safety, at least for homo sapiens, is not the issue.
The well-being of animals should be the reason for laws prohibiting their exploitation.
As letter writer Debra Probert pointed out on Wednesday, Surrey's bylaw doesn't go far enough. As well as outlawing the selling of exotic animals, it should ban the keeping of them, too.
Considering there are shelters in every municipality in Greater Vancouver filled to bursting with cats and dogs that would like nothing more than to be someone's Good Boy or Girl, caging beasts that belong in the wild seems especially unethical.
Besides, when entertainer Jim Stafford crooned, "I don't like spiders and snakes," he only had it half right.
The feeling is likely mutual.
Wanna iguana? Try Rover instead

[ Show Entire Thread ]