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
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9980
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:48 pm

I did, you ignored it. At least one of her sloths she said is unusually more tame than the others and seeks out her company. It would not be very stressful for her to put something on it if it was willing. I can put clothes and things on Pua without her stressing out. A stranger holding her on the other hand is stressful for her. Again the owner putting something on for a few seconds for a pic for an extra tame animal is different than being hauled across town. You are pointlessly nit picking. She said they are too easily stressed in typical show situations, hauled across town and handled by strangers etc. some how to you means they should never be touched by anyone then and is awful for doing so. You are going to an extreme to try and find some way to discredit her, by condemning her for touching them, but that is actually using Ar's own argument that no animal should ever be touched.

It's one thing to disagree with some statements she made about if she sells to pet owners or not. It's another to try and tear her down as person and call her names just because you disagree.

You don't have to be a charity to be a good owner and I don't see where the site says they are.

We discussed the conservation issue before. And whether she does or not does that make her a bad owner or bad person? So what if she makes that claim a whole heck of a lot of owners claim just owning their exotic pets counts as conservation as a reason exotic pets should be allowed.

Just because her research is unpublished doesn't make it invalid. Sure it would be nicer if she shared but it doesn't mean she hasn't researched and learned things and maybe shared, at least with some, though not the public. I guess I should take down all my anteater info just because it's not been in a peer reviewed publication. Just because someone didn't go to or finish college doesn't mean anything they learn via their research is invalid, again guess I should take all my research down and not offer info to anyone again because I didn't finish college officially(was only an AA but the instructor shorted me one credit and had too much going on to get it fixed). Anyway due to not having a bachelors guess everything I thought I knew is worthless. Or are you ONLY condemning her for none peer review and no college info because it's her. Either all info learned outside of strict criteria is worthless or it can be actually be valuable. If her credentials matter and if peer review matters for her then it does for me and others too and all my anteater info is trash. Or it's not and you are just using that argument against her because it's her and that blinds you to the fact that same argument harms others too.

The article so we should just go along with all articles against exotic owners and pile on the attack?

Baskin is thought to have killed her husband and fed her to cats??? But Chasing tail didn't do an interview so she's worse. Okay.

Oddly you don't seem to be using your real name either. And I've used various names online myself. Again somehow a sin for her but ookay for other owners, including you.

I'm not so much defending her as I am just pointing out your own issues. Many of the things you are trying to tear her down for, you would defend an owner about who you actually happened to like.

She has not said pets are bad or should be banned but did change her wording to distance herself from pets and be more commercial only. This is not even remotely the same as others who push ban legislation and out right say pets are bad and persecute others to get their pets taken for their sanctuaries.

I don't see what good it does to bash a public exotic owner using AR's own arguments that they use against all owners against them. That just give validity to those arguments and tears us all apart more. What good do you think would actually come from destroying her. She gets shut down and all her animal seized and sent to other facilities that are out right anti exotic pet and use the story to promote more bans, would be good because....???
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7726
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:46 pm

The things I am bothered by are 1) not selling to pet owners, and 2) not sharing information. That last bit is what I dislike most. All the other stuff, whether or not she's a conservationist or whatever is just going to be debated back and forth and isn't the heart of the issue, imo.

But it's crazy to compare her to someone like Carol Baskin. She's not trying to ban animals as pets. Nor did her husband mysteriously go missing.

I don't think it's right to try and tear down a fellow owner because she won't sell to non USDA-licensed individuals. She can still sell to private individuals who are USDA. I know that's not the best (best would be sell to pet owners too), but it does serve as a screening process for some people. I know and agree that USDA is not always better OR more qualified than private owners can be at times. But I see where she's coming from.

I think it's so upsetting because many people looked up to her. So it's disappointing and frustrating to see her change her positions on issues that are important to us. Yet no one has a problem with CJG Exotics who is the same way and won't sell sloths or tamandua to pet owners. Why not make a post about them too? For some reason she seems to be evil, but the other is okay. You got to be consistent at least.

Not condoning the two things I stated above, just trying to be reasonable about it. It's disappointing, yeah. But she does not deserve to be ripped apart.
3 red fox, 4 iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, tarantula
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9980
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:39 am

Ash wrote:The things I am bothered by are 1) not selling to pet owners, and 2) not sharing information. That last bit is what I dislike most. All the other stuff, whether or not she's a conservationist or whatever is just going to be debated back and forth and isn't the heart of the issue, imo.

But it's crazy to compare her to someone like Carol Baskin. She's not trying to ban animals as pets. Nor did her husband mysteriously go missing.

I don't think it's right to try and tear down a fellow owner because she won't sell to non USDA-licensed individuals. She can still sell to private individuals who are USDA. I know that's not the best (best would be sell to pet owners too), but it does serve as a screening process for some people. I know and agree that USDA is not always better OR more qualified than private owners can be at times. But I see where she's coming from.

I think it's so upsetting because many people looked up to her. So it's disappointing and frustrating to see her change her positions on issues that are important to us. Yet no one has a problem with CJG Exotics who is the same way and won't sell sloths or tamandua to pet owners. Why not make a post about them too? For some reason she seems to be evil, but the other is okay. You got to be consistent at least.

Not condoning the two things I stated above, just trying to be reasonable about it. It's disappointing, yeah. But she does not deserve to be ripped apart.


Thank you That's what I was trying to say, and agree with everything else too.

I can think of possible non-evil reasons for her not sharing like she used to and taking her care sheets down, like the info changing as she learns and criticisms about that, or perceived responsibilities for failures or imperfect info, and maybe not being able to keep up with keeping them updated but it is sad. Though there also is often an attitude that some owners acquire that is competitory that leads to unshared info, at least publicly. But we don't know her motives so it's all conjecture other than the unshared info is a sad loss.

She has distanced herself from pet owners, likely for PR reasons, and that's sad since she could be an advocate for pet owners, but it's still a far cry from condemning pet owners and working to ban them.
Buggle
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:14 am

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Buggle » Wed Dec 27, 2017 5:33 pm

Bora is upset because CT couldn't care less about other people who would like to follow in her foot steps. I can't say I blame him.

I'm a bit disappointed, I thought we all agreed that what she is doing is hideous. As I said before, withholding information that could potentially keep other captive sloths alive due to elitism is pretty bad. If sloths are as hard as you say they are, she's allowing other owners to go into it blind. It's an unfortunate reality that when attempting a new species, the first individuals may be lost due to lack of knowledge, but for someone to progress in their husbandry and not use that information to bring everyone up to speed to save animals...I think that qualifies someone for the distinction of being a bad person. Imagine if someone found out that toucans are dropping dead from iron storage disease, but they decided to only tell zoos this.

That's unacceptable. I find her information to be extremely valuable. But she is misleading and deceiving when she indicates that she does professional research. Peer-reviewed research is held up to the highest standards imaginable, it is not the same as jotting down some observations. That means something. That requires a degree and review by others with degrees. If this process wasn't that much better than informal ones, why would researchers waste their time doing it? People come on her page thinking they are looking at some professional institution affiliated with real in situ conservation efforts and she knows that. It's almost fraud. Are there any statements on her page stating that none of her sloths are actually endangered? That they are pets, there for the benefit of human amusement?

CT has a thriving business based on supposedly friendly sloths. When you make reservations, that is not really conducive towards an optimal environment for an easily stressed species. People are showing up whether the sloths are OK with it or not, and they pay immense fees. She's taking the risks because it helps her make money, point blank. That's a pretty big glass house to be in. When someone brings up Baskin's name, tensions seem to run high. I will only say this, the information on her husband hasn't been proven in a court of law, so it's not relevant to me. If someone we respected was accused and it wasn't proven, we'd do the same. And, if CT pulled her shenanigans, that would obviously come back to her unaccredited facility that operates solely on principals hated by all AR activists. She knows better. I'm not crediting her for that. Seems to me that she is behaving like AR despite not being them, in a way I think that's worse. When people realize that even a nice-looking place like hers is 'dirty', they're just going to hate us more. I wouldn't even blame them. I can't stand lying.
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7726
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Wed Dec 27, 2017 6:29 pm

Buggle wrote:I'm a bit disappointed, I thought we all agreed that what she is doing is hideous. As I said before, withholding information that could potentially keep other captive sloths alive due to elitism is pretty bad. If sloths are as hard as you say they are, she's allowing other owners to go into it blind. It's an unfortunate reality that when attempting a new species, the first individuals may be lost due to lack of knowledge, but for someone to progress in their husbandry and not use that information to bring everyone up to speed to save animals...I think that qualifies someone for the distinction of being a bad person. Imagine if someone found out that toucans are dropping dead from iron storage disease, but they decided to only tell zoos this.


This is exactly how I feel about that.
3 red fox, 4 iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, tarantula
User avatar
TurkRoach
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TurkRoach » Wed Dec 27, 2017 7:01 pm

Okay,I might have crossed the line by questioning about her name change or in-situ work, making myself sound like Alex Jones ranting about the chemicals in the water. My problem with Chasing Tail isn't the fact that she doesn't sell to "the general public" (although I wont deny I am salty). As Buggle said before its her business we cant tell her how to do it. What makes me mad about chasing tail is her pretentiousness as you can see on her website and the reddit post Buggle shared, and how she changes from a pioneering pet owner to a considerably sleazy "conservation center" which is basically a house with basic cages, who uses weasel words to pull more customers and make her sound better then other breeders as she avoids ARs. (Hmm, an animal facility changing into something pretentious owned by one on a high horse ? I think someone mentioned such dejavu here before maybe that is why I got "crazy")

I never said that Chasing Tail would be on a pursuit to ban exotics to have a monopoly. I assume that she would be the person who didn't do much to fight a ban because she probably will be exempt from it and keep the pets of her choice any time she wants, as some people turn into potential criminals for dreaming to have a fraction of what she has. Which I consider a bit worse

Also regarding CJG since some of you mentioned him; I don't like his "not a pet" policy and constantly using the word zoological to describe an animal. However unlike the case with chasing tail a naive fool me did not see footage of CJG keeping his/her animals at home holding/petting them, feeding them froot loops, and putting an harness on them (while making money) and dreaming to be like him/her when I move to the US, only to learn a few years later about his "not a pet policies" as he keeps his pets in the aforementioned style.

Maybe if Chasing Tail and many other private owners admit the fact that they are a pet owners without being ashamed, I am sure that this "community" could get a little bit stronger.

And yes I caved into your points regarding my issues (which is why I am responding now), but that wont change my stand on how Chasing tail is a s__mbag and how she is similar to baskin.
Bora Kalem
User avatar
Ash
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 7726
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:38 am
Location: Utah

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Ash » Wed Dec 27, 2017 7:28 pm

I can certainly agree that pet owners need to stand together and not feel ashamed of who they are. And those with species like CT has should stand alongside us. It's sad that many won't who are in a "higher" position do that. Sometimes I slip into saying my pets are zoological/ambassadors/etc because I fear the potential backlash. It's definitely something the community should be better at. And I can be better too.
3 red fox, 4 iguanas, nile monitor, BW tegu, sailfin dragon, leachie gecko, 6 snakes, 2 salamanders, tarantula
otterpop
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:57 am

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby otterpop » Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:47 pm

Hey folks, I rarely post anywhere anymore, but thot it would be appropiate for me to chime up here. First of all, the one thing most damaging to common interests for involved participants in a controversial (or at least non-conforming) activity, such as our exotic/"wild" animal keeping, is in-fighting among each other…

I wrote the bulk of this piece in response to the latest post I saw here being on Christmas day, but I will keep it intact as follows.

Granted I have had little contact with the owner of Chasing-Tail in the past, other than to inquire of her contacts with the state officials who do all the formal procedures, namely issuing permits and such. My experience following such advise led to me being raked across the coals from one particular state department of Agriculture official who condemned me for keeping river otters, etcetera. Obviously I didn’t share the level of approval that Chasing-Tail enjoyed. I do realize that the position of the particular state official at the time was less permissive than Carnal Contessa’s opinion over my inquiries, and I was appreciative of her advise I did receive. I left it to that and haven’t bothered Chasing Tail since then, particuality there was little need to ask her about species of animals she had no experience with. I believe that was in 2012. I say here that subsequently I did receive more cordial behavior from Fish and Wildlife officials, who since then have shown willingness to work with my interests.
My big thing, concern, what have you, is that IN PRINCIPAL I would agree with Chasing-Tail’s blanket public approach to exotic pets.
I work at a local discount store for the income and stability sufficient for me to care for my “critters”. Over the years I often think about the masses of people I deal with each day, and how few, if ANY would really be qualified to keep even the most convenient animals, let alone someone who could possibly succeed at raising any animal requiring considerable skill and tolerance. I have had my fill about hearing about such-and-such exotic animal situation becoming a tragedy and providing prime fodder for the AR groups to attack all exotic animal ownership. Even though I support the ability for private people (like you and me) owning exotic- etc. animals, there has got to be some restriction on how people can obtain them. Frankly there will always be many who will skirt common sense and try to get whatever animal they want at the moment, usually for status, to amaze their friends or the ‘hood. Those are the ones who need to be stopped, preferably before the luckless animal is acquired by said fool. The real truth of some mistake too often comes out after another animal dies an unfortunate early death. It is up to all of us that that situation is minimized, or the TPTB will see to it that nobody outside of closed society will get to have what we can still have, at least in part, now.

I myself would have to know a prospective owner in person before they’d ever get an animal from me, exchange of money would be the least of my concern. I’d rather give an animal free to somebody I felt was able to successfully keep it than sell to a stranger, aka the general public. If there was any prospect of me providing animals to anyone, I’d have as a “firewall”, some blatant statement attesting to the inappropriateness of having such animals as “pets’, at least in a language that Joe-six-pac could understand. Once someone gets past that point, maybe there is a chance that I could have a real deal. And then I can learn about such person, of why, how, and what they already know. And what they can expect from such an animal. Then I would have to decide if I can divulge how that person can achieve his/her own dream, while minimizing the chance that I am simply dealing with a smartazz, con-artist, or help cause the eventual premature demise of the animal I placed in his/her own hands.
That is, only if I had the expendable amount of time to even be willing to play that game in trying to figure out who is appropriate and who is not to keep the animal, once I was done cleaning enclosures.
Maybe Carnal Contessa feels secure by her preferred method of a “firewall”. Rather harsh, but at least it isn’t something many commercial suppliers would prefer selling their animals to nearly anyone with a credit card.

Having some control over supply is a tiny piece of the solution. Rarety of an animal is only one limiting factor when that species is seldom offered for sale, with the appropriate price, something which is not a factor for wealthy individuals who think nothing of getting an animal of status. What isn’t a solution is a situation where the government feels compelled to step in, and obliterate all exotic/”wild” animal keeping by individuals because any alternative seems to be ineffective or unpopular, at least in the eyes of the AZA, HSUS and other AR groups, those who have many friends in government.

In the meantime, AZA or people like Carole Baskin, after achieving their own goals and dreams, work to get on the side with some AR-afflicted government agencies and to block anyone else being viewed as some sort of competition. For example, the worst thing that a zoo wants is to have a private person (us!) owning the same species of animal the zoo itself charges everyone to see.

Personally, keeping a “pet” otter is a tremendous undertaking, even though I myself consider it to be nearly automatic now for me. I raised my otter from babyhood until I had to accompany him up to the rainbow bridge some twenty years later. He was my first otter. Obviously, according to Chasing-tail’s criteria, I would’ve been woefully unqualified to undergo such an achievement. But I was determined nevertheless. I had to learn how to live with that otter from scratch apart from occasional valuable hints and suggestions from other otter owners like myself. I was hardly able to get anything from zoos, I had to realize I wasn’t going to get any information whatsoever from any of them any more they weren’t likely going to get any money from me while I had my own otter. I am sure most of those people whom I had pressed for ideas weren’t about to talk to anyone, let alone to me on how to get and keep a “pet otter”. These days although I am still of the same conviction. I will not do ANYTHING to suggest that someone else can easily keep a “pet otter”, although I will neither promote an idea that only special-priveledged-empowered-elite persons can get involved with such a thing. If someone wants an otter badly enough and is also willing to work with the law, then they should be able to find it possible to achieve that dream if they know what they are getting into. If it is illegal in their area, then there is always the option of relocation to where it is legal, as I had done. The BIG danger in that is what to do if the law changes for the worst, and your beloved pet becomes illegal. People like Carole Baskin could care less, except basking in the zeal of destroying another life in the act of selfishness or receiving another animal SHE helps to seize for nothing else than the rightful owner not being in her tight circle of friends. Pitfalls such as that need to be thought over, and having an alternative strategy is imperative as part of keeping your animal companion comfortable.

I am sure, considering the same opposition that we all face here, Chasing-Tail has had to harden herself in order to stay on the favorable side of society, ODFW, USDA and keeping her animals safe from all the most millitant fringes of AR, and display a strong disapproval of private ownership of certain animals. Her “animal encounters” are just her thing she seems to know what she is doing, like a few places around the country are heading into to cover expenses or demonstrate an alternative non-AZA form of public purpose. I have yet to even see a tamandua or sloth, let alone be in close proximity with them. My knowledge of the fragility of such animals is lacking, me being the keeper of the much more durable river otter and raccoon, I can offer no opinion on whether or not such animals can ever be trusted with untrained and “uncredentialed” private citizens. I can guess that a few people, like Mary, have gone beyond the stretch and end up successfully rearing and maintaining a species of animal that 99.99999% of people in USA are unqualified to tackle. Difficulty of obtaining is one method to limit the frequency of inapropiate acquisitions. But that alone is not enough. USDA licensing may or may not be appropriate. I do know of a few details and experiences involved with life with an otter to be able to dissuade most prospective otter owners. But the average person will not get that from visiting a zoo, watching a nature program, or reading Ring of Bright Water to convince them an otter is not an ideal pet. It is up to us who can offer real-life knowledge in order to separate the casual from the dead serious. Chasing Tail has most likely had to rezort to her form of restricting or stating an opposition toward the practice of exotic animal keeping by “regular” people because acquisition difficulty and lack of regulation has been insufficient to restrict the unwise from getting these animals.

Don’t get me wrong in assuming that I agree with the idea of private people being unqualified to keep these animals. I myself, would be the least “qualified”. I have no degree, period, let alone one in the biological, zoological or environmental sciences. I have never worked in a formal zoo. I am not licenced by the USDA. Having been a volunteer in what could otherwise be referred to as a “roadside zoo” by those of AZA-caliber hardly gets me credit for the often required experience in the care of certain animals (otters) for the most linient of permitting agencies. Kind of like a an old TV commercial- I did it the old fashioned way- I read up on everything otter, and was able to get my butt into the most intensive “hands-on” (without actual handling) work I could get myself into, eventually being able to cover all aspects of care for the museum’s otters. Sadly something that paperpushers have recently achieved to make illegal now. Unfortunately, for today’s youth, there is no “app” to teach otter-keeping. Now I doubt I could get away even with more than just cleaning up otter poop in a zoo. Not saying such a task couldn’t talk an average person out from wanting to clean up after their own otter. I have always been willing to teach other people the ropes on how to raise an otter, but I doubt I would place such knowledge onto the web for all the public to see. Liability is one concern (“I followed his advise to the letter as posted on his care sheets, and my animal still died because of…”).
Although I don’t know how to go about teaching people these days. My “elmers” were of a long ago past generation when life was simpler, devoid of all the modern social media and data overload, and where common sense was a make-or-break factor.

Now if Chasing-Tail’s position has indeed gone the way of supporting the mission of AR, AZA, and HSUS, then I will stand corrected. Up to now I have believed she has been on our side. Otherwise, as I have already seen other former allies to our cause depart in the past, I will go on as before. The rest of us who believe that exotic animal ownership need not be a badge of inclusion inside the nobles-only class, but as commoners who simply go beyond the usual effort, will remain true to the cause, of doing what we can do to preserve our own favorite animal. There is no special priveledge in the act of keeping and maintaining an unusual animal. It is only an unusual ability and plenty of patience of being able to achieve something most people are not willing to bother themselves with for. It is the AZA and any other group full of themselves who will allow the disappearance of such animals in spite of their holiness should folks like us disappear. I bet they would prefer extinction over allowing non-elites keeping animals.

It is my hope that Chasing Tail hasn’t gone in that direction.

One of the greatest weapons AR groups have against us is to forment in-fighting and petty differences among us, apart from the already obvious isolation many of us have to deal with, in spite of common-ground, in order to maintain the enjoyment of animals ill-suited for city life. We are up against a formidable enemy that does not sleep. Their goal is made only easier when we stand divided and bickering about some issue.

I hope I haven’t been too rambling here. Wrote this on Office after midnight, then copy and paste onto my message window. Now see why I hardly post, eh?
otterpop
What the hell, it’s already public record, so I feel everybody here should know it too.
Bill Ahlquist (yes, my real name), aka otterpop. ODFW wildlife holding permit #6911 for the two aging raccoons in my care.
\I do have a facebook account, but as I have chosen exile (remoteness) over speedy internet access, it is almost useless to contact me there.
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9980
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:04 pm

TurkRoach wrote: I assume that she would be the person who didn't do much to fight a ban because she probably will be exempt from it and keep the pets of her choice any time she wants, ... Which I consider a bit worse


That mindset is bad, when anyone has it, but I don't see it as worse. You can say not choosing to try to rescue someone is harmful but it's not worse than someone grabbing their head and shoving them underwater till they die. Replace the analogy with exotic ban laws and you get the same thing but pet lives instead. It's disappointing and it deprives those fighting against the bans of the weight that person or facility could have added to the fight and deprivation can be harmful but it's not as bad as actively pushing the bans or out right saying pet ownership is bad.

Vast majority of her animals are not in her house and their enclosures never shown. She even has a big enrichment pen with trees and climbs and such that animals get to spend time in.

I do see why you are disappointed and saying you are disappointed that she doesn't share more and doesn't promote pets any more is fine. I agree having more people promote pets as okay would be helpful. Joining in the fight to try and bring her down by picking everything about her apart I see as only harmful though.

Buggle wrote:That requires a degree and review by others with degrees.


Actually a degree of any sort is not a requirement and the reviews are anonymous to avoid such bias. A lot of papers on animals, especially in the field is just published observations. It's not like double blind study is required to note a behavior you saw. Repeated observation would be required to make solid conclusions though. I saw one published paper where the guy just documented what happened when a male and female tamandua met on a log. Another was doing other in dept research but published a paper on their having seen one swimming. Of course that makes it sound easy but it requires time and effort to get published, being approved is mostly in how it's written out for these sorts of cases. She has a real job that she has to fly across country for, plus her "zoo" and a family. I can see why she might not bother with official papers and don't think info not from official papers is valueless but should be looked at with a more critical eye, but research is not a university or published only exclusive word. I do think it's sad she no longer shares her info(findings) but can think of legit reasons to be reluctant to do so other than evil intents.

I don't know if she has any endangered sloths or not. She has a lot of species she just doesn't show to the public any of the endangered that she has a USDI for. Just because something is not public does not mean it doesn't exist. Her latest on the sight clarifies the in field work of relocation was done in the 80's. I know she knows people there and knows someone with a large captive tamandua facility and was able to track down where Aurora came from through those connections. But no one can say for sure other than her or someone involved.

When someone brings up Baskin's name, tensions seem to run high. I will only say this, the information on her husband hasn't been proven in a court of law, so it's not relevant to me.


Good point. It's a little easier to be biased when someone is overtly anti-exotic but that doesn't make it right.

Sure the sloths can'r say no visitors today but a good owners knows by the animals behavior if it's up to it and it's set up so the sloths can stay well away from people if they want to. Most of the sloths are not in the house or displayed.
User avatar
TamanduaGirl
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9980
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby TamanduaGirl » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:14 pm

otterpop wrote:I hope I haven’t been too rambling here. Wrote this on Office after midnight, then copy and paste onto my message window. Now see why I hardly post, eh?
otterpop


Always nice to have you participate. Not rambling. All well thought out ans said.

One of the greatest weapons AR groups have against us is to forment in-fighting and petty differences among us, apart from the already obvious isolation many of us have to deal with, in spite of common-ground, in order to maintain the enjoyment of animals ill-suited for city life. We are up against a formidable enemy that does not sleep. Their goal is made only easier when we stand divided and bickering about some issue.


To avoid droning on myself and chasing in circles with others I'll focus on this. Very much agree and my main point. By picking up the fight against her just because we may not agree with a policy or something she said, we are only helping AR with their work. And heck if she indeed is on the fence a bunch of pet owners coming at her along with the AR could push her over because then at least the ARs would stop, if she did go full AR herself. They are better at protecting their own than we are.
User avatar
Peacefulward
Posts: 545
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 4:59 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Peacefulward » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:45 pm

I agree with a little bit of everything you guys said here.

Despite Chasing Tail being anti-exotic pet nowadays, I still think we should be nice and treat her respectfully. Being rude to her will only reaffirm her beliefs that our community is immature and toxic.

I do believe that one day, she will come around again.
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).
Buggle
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:14 am

Re: Rant on a thing

Postby Buggle » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:54 pm

A lot of papers on animals, especially in the field is just published observations. It's not like double blind study is required to note a behavior you saw. Repeated observation would be required to make solid conclusions though. I saw one published paper where the guy just documented what happened when a male and female tamandua met on a log


That's true, but since she supposedly keeps a high volume of animals and claims it is for research, I'd expect a little more, such as charts and graphs detailing growth rates, reproductive rates, longevity, ect for certain diets or something like that. I can't know what exactly she does because it's all a big secret yet she is willing to take our money, claiming she is contributing something. She could at least state what research she does and what species she keeps, even AZA zoos and private conservation centers do that. A big part of her business model is earning the trust of visitors who think their money is going to a 'legitimate' conservation effort. She's never fully admitted to selling sloths as pets. She uses weasel words such as 'sell surplus animals to qualified facilities' In the average person's mind, they're thinking that is a professional zoo or a 'sanctuary'. All this deception and word games among insecure exotic owners drive me crazy.

Also, I hate CJG Exotics. I've made multiple attempts to contact them and someone they are affiliated with. That affiliate always responds, tells me a certain animal will come in next month, ect., then I never hear from him again. I was about to send CJG money and then they told me the animal may already be sold, and I never heard from them again. They never told me what happened and they didn't respond to my other inquiries for other animals on several occasions.

Return to “Controversial ANIMAL Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest