PUT EXTRA MONEY IN YOUR POCKET
https://www.ebates.com/r/SYBIL414?eeid=29041

Rant on a thing

Hunting/Farming/Taxidermy, any topic that may get heated debate.

WARNING things may get a bit rougher here than the other forums.

Moderators: Ash, TamanduaGirl

User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7796
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:32 am

"We DO NOT condone or support in any way the keeping of sloths as pets. Nor will we provide any information to to anyone who is not affiliated with at accredited zoo or wildlife center."


Maybe I was wrong to assume otherwise. :( She always seems pro-exotic in her posts though, so I'm not sure why she would have that on her website except if she truly DOES believe that. And if she truly does, then that's NO good... I understand where she'd be coming from, but that does NOT excuse the change.

I don't understand why she wouldn't share information. :/ That part is what concerns me the most about that quote, tbh.

It sounds like she's becoming jaded toward the exotic pet community, like she's seen many examples of poor care and therefore deems "regular people" unfit to keep these animals. I wouldn't compare her to Carole Baskin (that woman is absolutely horrendous), but I see what you mean about her slipping to be an anti. That's a shame. I really looked up to her.

I hope she changes back to what she was before. I really do.
3 red fox, 4 pectinata iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, 3 tarantulas
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:54 am

That quote isn't from her website though she did say it somewhere.

This is her current statement from the FAQ page, not quite as harsh.

"Q: Do you sell animals to the public as pets?
A: Sloths are not pets - for many reasons. That being said, if we do have surplus animals, we will place them out at other zoological facilities. As of roughly five years ago (2010ish), we no longer place our sloths out because of the fact that they require such highly specialized care. We have utilized websites that are designed for zoological facilities to advertise surplus animals and for them to post that they are seeking certain species of animals. Since the Internet can be accessed by anyone, some websites were accessed by the public in the civilian search for exotic animals to keep as pets. We do not sell to "pet" homes any species in which we house. It would be irresponsible of us to keep every animal born at our facility considering that we focus on rare and endangered species. Exchanging animals with other facilities is how we keep bloodlines broadened as well as working with multiple species in the Species Survival Program."
Buggle
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:14 am

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Buggle » Thu Oct 05, 2017 4:29 pm

Ash wrote:
"We DO NOT condone or support in any way the keeping of sloths as pets. Nor will we provide any information to to anyone who is not affiliated with at accredited zoo or wildlife center."


Maybe I was wrong to assume otherwise. :( She always seems pro-exotic in her posts though, so I'm not sure why she would have that on her website except if she truly DOES believe that. And if she truly does, then that's NO good... I understand where she'd be coming from, but that does NOT excuse the change.

I don't understand why she wouldn't share information. :/ That part is what concerns me the most about that quote, tbh.

It sounds like she's becoming jaded toward the exotic pet community, like she's seen many examples of poor care and therefore deems "regular people" unfit to keep these animals. I wouldn't compare her to Carole Baskin (that woman is absolutely horrendous), but I see what you mean about her slipping to be an anti. That's a shame. I really looked up to her.

I hope she changes back to what she was before. I really do.


I should have clarified that I received this message from her or her affiliates asking that I remove information that I had on my Hubpages (with credit to her) that I retained from her articles back when she had caresheets. I intended to use this information myself should I ever progress to more difficult species. She said the information was "antiquated" and as the quote shows she won't provide me with any new information. So, should I ever decide I want to try with a sloth, I'll know that there is information out there that could potentially prevent a mishap that she is refusing me because I'm not licensed. In other words, MY PET COULD DIE DUE TO ELITISM. I was also just really hurt to receive a message like that from my pages where I am fighting to protect the lifestyles of people like her and I have or had similar aspirations. I'm thinking I should try to put more time into gardening since this exotic pet stuff is so painful and stressful.

I'm so utterly sick of the use of the words such as "zoological facility", "conservation center" ect., that seem to suggest 'higher education' but are mostly just privileged people with no more knowledge or capabilities than I have. That kind of stuff is just killing us. Exotic pets are for privileged and social people with friends in the right places and if I have any kyrptonite, it's 'friends' and 'popularity'. Thank the heavens for Kapy'iva Exotics one of the few remaining non-elitist breeders.
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:07 pm

I agree with that sentiment. I want the best info out there on anteaters to help save their lives and make their lives longer and better. I'm also not above acknowledging mistakes. Someone in Japan wrote me to ask about my advocating formula in my care sheet. I reread it and found the info and updated to clarify. This person explained that in Japan they were continuing to feed formula to adults and causing premature deaths because of the retinol in it. So I updated my care sheet to clarify it should only be used in adults to get them eating then wean them off of it.

No good reason to keep good care info secret. It's not like you can patent it and make money. Maybe could write a book on the care but even when I do write my fennec fox care book I wont be taking my free info down. I want all fennecs and anteaters to live longer and better lives, not just mine.
Buggle
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:14 am

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Buggle » Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:02 am

Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but Bora just introduced me to a lovely website, The Wayback Machine, really gives some perspective. On November of 2010, the Chasing-Tail website went from this: https://web.archive.org/web/20111028035918/http://www.chasing-tail.com/ ... to this: https://web.archive.org/web/20111127202014/http://www.chasing-tail.com/

Her older page was amazing. Right there at the top, "SUPPORTING RESPONSIBLE EXOTIC ANIMAL OWNERSHIP" There are caresheets, blogs, and the word 'pet' is used constantly. It is an informal, unashamed, pro-pet ownership site.

Then, overnight, the new page becomes "ENDANGERED PLANET ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS" and "Zoological Wildlife Propagation, Education & Captive Husbandry Research". The word "pet" is completely GONE. Try it, I used Ctrl F, put in the word pet. It's gone (except when meaning 'petting')! What I find particularly deplorable is how she won't even acknowledge this change to people. She still enjoys the exotic pet lifestyle (buying, breeding, importing, even from the wild) , but likes to come off as some restrictive AZA facility, making up excuses that she hopes the public will buy, to suggest it is some conservation and educational duty for her to maintain the most awesome collection of animals as pets while it is unacceptable for 'civilians' to do so. There's so much to loathe here, such as the suggestion that keeping exotic pets needs justification (a problem I have with so many zoos making 'excuses' claiming conservation and education, suggesting captivity is 'wrong' 'unless..'), the blatant and obvious lying/double speak (her critics would have a field day with this information), and her making money selling 'encounters' with the so-called sensitive and delicate species because me keeping it as a pet = terrible but when it comes to lining her pockets a little stress never killed anyone, right? This is despicable.

By the way, here is the Reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/comments/18fxwb/the_sloth_center_in_rainier_or_1hr_from_portland/#bottom-comments

Example of double speak: "Are you engaged in the selling of exotic animals to private owners other than zoos or conservation centers/sanctuaries?"

"IT SIMPLY IS NOT AS BLACK AND WHITE AS THAT AND WE WILL NOT HAVE THINGS TWISTED BECAUSE SOMEONE IS MISINFORMED OR DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF HOW PROJECTS ARE ORGANIZED. WHEN WE HAVE "OVERSTOCK" WE DO PLACE THEM ON THE MARKET TO BE PURCHASED BY CONCERNS THAT NEED THAT PARTICULAR SPECIES FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT, WHETHER THAT BE OUT-REACH, EDUCATION, BREEDING, OR (CRINGE) "FOR PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT" AT A ZOO (WE REITERATE - SOME SPECIES HANDLE THIS BETTER THAN OTHERS - I AM NOT "AGAINST" PUBLIC DISPLAY ENTERTAINMENT AT ZOOS - IF DONE ACCORDING TO WHAT THE SPECIES NEEDS NOT WHAT THE HUMANS WANT). WE BELIEVE THE ANSWER TO THE BELOW WILL BETTER ANSWER WHAT WE BELIEVE IS YOUR UNDERLYING CONCERN."

Answer should have been: Yes I sell to responsible private owners and there is nothing wrong with that.
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7796
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:18 pm

Seeing all this makes me want to go change my website up for the better. Right now I come across as a zoological facility, but I also want to encourage private ownership. I have fox caresheets on my site. Do I come across as hypocritical on mine? https://www.wildhearts-exoticanimals.com/
3 red fox, 4 pectinata iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, 3 tarantulas
User avatar
Peacefulward
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 4:59 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Peacefulward » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:16 pm

Ash wrote:Seeing all this makes me want to go change my website up for the better. Right now I come across as a zoological facility, but I also want to encourage private ownership. I have fox caresheets on my site. Do I come across as hypocritical on mine? https://www.wildhearts-exoticanimals.com/


I didn't know you had a website, looks good!
5 Dogs, 2 cats, 2 leopard geckos, 1 guinea pig, 1 axolotl, and a coatimundi currently in my family. :)

Exotic "wishlist": red fox, arctic fox, gray fox, bat eared fox, fennec fox, mink, muntjac deer, owl (any species).
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7796
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:41 pm

Thank you. I just don't want to come across like I'm superior to other people, or that because I'm USDA I can have exotics and the public can't. I want to remain being a facility that is pro ownership.
3 red fox, 4 pectinata iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, 3 tarantulas
User avatar
TurkRoach
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TurkRoach » Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:26 am

Buggle wrote:"IT SIMPLY IS NOT AS BLACK AND WHITE AS THAT AND WE WILL NOT HAVE THINGS TWISTED BECAUSE SOMEONE IS MISINFORMED OR DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF HOW PROJECTS ARE ORGANIZED. WHEN WE HAVE "OVERSTOCK" WE DO PLACE THEM ON THE MARKET TO BE PURCHASED BY CONCERNS THAT NEED THAT PARTICULAR SPECIES FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT, WHETHER THAT BE OUT-REACH, EDUCATION, BREEDING, OR (CRINGE) "FOR PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT" AT A ZOO (WE REITERATE - SOME SPECIES HANDLE THIS BETTER THAN OTHERS - I AM NOT "AGAINST" PUBLIC DISPLAY ENTERTAINMENT AT ZOOS - IF DONE ACCORDING TO WHAT THE SPECIES NEEDS NOT WHAT THE HUMANS WANT). WE BELIEVE THE ANSWER TO THE BELOW WILL BETTER ANSWER WHAT WE BELIEVE IS YOUR UNDERLYING CONCERN."


Well, someone has won the Pretentious Olympics...
Bora Kalem
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:33 pm

Your site is good Ash. There are a lot of bad fox owners but I think the difference is trying to say how to do it right and what to expect so people have realistic expectations rather than saying only special people or even no one should do it.
User avatar
TurkRoach
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TurkRoach » Sun Dec 24, 2017 3:58 pm

TamanduaGirl wrote:Her encounters are pretty strict though from what I had read before. The animals aren't moved and people come to them and the number of visits limited, and no one can pick them up and only can interact if the sloth chooses to come to them. Much different from the typical encounter where they are woken up and moved to be seen and touched.


Their current website indicated that visitors can touch the sloths. Also if sloths are that delicate then why are there pics on their facebook page of the sloths wearing accessories?
Bora Kalem
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7796
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:24 pm

Strange. I don't really have an answer. :/ Very sad to see her start going in this direction... I always had idolized her.
3 red fox, 4 pectinata iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, 3 tarantulas
User avatar
TurkRoach
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TurkRoach » Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:33 pm

I know the feeling Ash.. I know the feeling.
Bora Kalem
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Mon Dec 25, 2017 1:00 am

TurkRoach wrote:
TamanduaGirl wrote:Her encounters are pretty strict though from what I had read before. The animals aren't moved and people come to them and the number of visits limited, and no one can pick them up and only can interact if the sloth chooses to come to them. Much different from the typical encounter where they are woken up and moved to be seen and touched.


Their current website indicated that visitors can touch the sloths. Also if sloths are that delicate then why are there pics on their facebook page of the sloths wearing accessories?


A sloth coming down within reach being touched, when it had the choice not to, and one hand raised who is extra tame having the owner put something on it is a much different level of stress to a wild caught one being crated up driven across town, shown to a crowd of people and letting strangers hold and hug it. So no her letting some people touch one if they follow the rules is not hypocritical to her saying she doesn't take them out to do shows any more and suggesting others don't.
User avatar
TurkRoach
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TurkRoach » Mon Dec 25, 2017 4:09 pm

Well TamanduaGirl you got me real good. However you still didn't explain this picture I attached which I mentioned previously regarding accessories. I doubt a sloth would willingly put a tiara on itself willingly. Wouldn't the tiara put this poor fragile animal into stress?

While TamanduaGirl defends her pal by refuting my excuse of an argument(s) I want everybody to see these point I have based on this article which was posted only a few months ago: http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-north ... ounds.html

1.Chasing tail's facility is not registered as a 501(c)3 nonprofit through the Internal Revenue Service despite her website saying otherwise.
2.Just like how Trull from Costa Rica implied, chasing tail's in-situ conservation is very mysterious. The site of her business barely mentions her in-situ activities. The employees nor the owner of the business refuses to talk about the in-situ activities. This brings some lack of transparency.
3.Chasing tail as a person is very peculiar. She has has at least one name change. And since she hasn't done any research articles it is impossible to know her educational background, therefore it is hard to confirm that she is a researcher. And there is the lack of transparency as mentioned in the aforementioned point and the fact that chasing tail herself wont be a part of the interview. This lack of transperency can not only her her business but also hurt the industry as a whole.

I really didn't want to say this but baskin of bcr probably is less shadier than chasing tail considering how she let her guard down for an tv interview. I doubt chasing tail gives a horses _s_ about the rights of other exotic animal keepers or the integrity of her business because she knows well that her life will always be filled with animals until its end.

Arrogant people like her are probably a problem to the joke of a community like ours just like irresponsible owners and AR organizations. I believe that people in this "community" should be educated about her actions, and she should be as criticized as much as Joe exotic is for her pompousness.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Bora Kalem

Return to “Controversial ANIMAL Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests