Wild caught specimens.

[ingie]

You would think so, but the amount of vets that charge big bucks for treating really sick rats that have poor quality of life and are going to die soon anyway, instead of advocating to PTS, you would be surprised. Also, you don't have to show a vet your reptile license when you take a reptile in for treatment. I assume many people who want to do things the sneaky way, would pretend it is their pet, and then it is up to them whether to try everything or PTS. I have seen a vet surgery save a cat that got run over and lost 3 of it's legs and large chunks of it's body, and it was just brought in by someone who found it. They raised money to cover their bill, by sending a photo of the poor thing around Facebook. Vets are only human too, and I am sure many of them like to save everything possible because they believe it is the right thing to do.

 

[andynic07]

You would think so, but the amount of vets that charge big bucks for treating really sick rats that have poor quality of life and are going to die soon anyway, instead of advocating to PTS, you would be surprised. Also, you don't have to show a vet your reptile license when you take a reptile in for treatment. I assume many people who want to do things the sneaky way, would pretend it is their pet, and then it is up to them whether to try everything or PTS. I have seen a vet surgery save a cat that got run over and lost 3 of it's legs and large chunks of it's body, and it was just brought in by someone who found it. They raised money to cover their bill, by sending a photo of the poor thing around Facebook. Vets are only human too, and I am sure many of them like to save everything possible because they believe it is the right thing to do.

I agree that some unethical vets will charge a lot to try and save an animal , at the owners expense without considering quality of life but with native wildlife that is brought in as such they either treat for free or the government pays. Not sure which of these two scenarios is the actual case but whenever I have taken injured wildlife in I have not had to pay.

 

[ingie]

I would be shocked if the government paid for it. I think it would more likely be that the vets would choose to do it themselves, or they had wildlife loving groups chipping in or something.

 

[lizardwhisperer]

Thats all good and you are entitled to your opinion. But as a former wildlife rescuer and carer I can absolutely say that rehabilitating wildlife where possible is much more beneficial then just letting it die in the bush or backyard. The main goal of rehabilitating wildlife is to return that animal to its home range so it can hopefully breed again and keep things going.
The action of rehabilitating and not returning has its benefits too. I am not sure about where you got the part about reptiles not being able to look forward to being healthy again, because in my experience reptiles heal much quicker then mammals, so in my opinion its because they want it more. "Little mammals" are in the same boat as reptiles, you can't have feelings for one species and not the next.... why wouldn't it be just the same to let a mammal be part of the circle too?
A life is life, wether it is a mammal, reptile or crustacean.

What I was told was that this person asked the vet what it's best chance of surviving was and was to be given INTENSIVE CARE , and since they had a very busy practice they didn't think it would get the same intensity of care in the practice (feeding, pain relief injections and antibiotics and other needs) and since this person was well equipped to care for it and prepared to make the effort and since it was young the joint decision was made that it would be cared for by the person (under their vetinary supervision).

It was entitled to being given the best possible chance to recover. I think the vet and this person made the right decision. If the vet had thought it was too severely injured to be rehabilitated then I'm sure it would have been humanely put down.

 

[cement]

What I was told was that this person asked the vet what it's best chance of surviving was and was to be given INTENSIVE CARE , and since they had a very busy practice they didn't think it would get the same intensity of care in the practice (feeding, pain relief injections and antibiotics and other needs) and since this person was well equipped to care for it and prepared to make the effort and since it was young the joint decision was made that it would be cared for by the person (under their vetinary supervision).

It was entitled to being given the best possible chance to recover. I think the vet and this person made the right decision. If the vet had thought it was too severely injured to be rehabilitated then I'm sure it would have been humanely put down.

I am sure you are right too. The vets make the call, so if they feel there is a chance and the person is willing to work with the vet then go ahead.

You haven't upset me Ingie, and i agree with some of what you say. I am one of the few people licenced by the NSW NPWS to euthanase wildlife and believe me, if an animal is beyond repair then it gets euthed on the spot no if's, but's or maybe's.
You are generalising wildlife care and rehab, by saying things like "if you can rehab in a short time......etc" That's not always the case. Wildlife rehab is or should be done on a case by case scenario, if the carer is good and keeps the patient away from other animals and nice and clean, it doesn't matter how long you keep it for before returning to the bush.
Many, many reptiles are now kept on licence that were brought in as injured or out of area animals, and they do just fine. You would probably be amazed at the ability of reptiles to heal when given the right conditions, and this is probably because they don't have the emotional scarring of mammals that is a burden. Can a mammal survive amputation in the wild without human intervention?
Also, reptiles that are "just genetically weak,and not meant to go on and reproduce" are only found in the hobby! Not the wild.

 

[Tesla]

I think the licensing system has basically chlorinated the history of Australian herpetology. So many people are shocked that there are people who are permitted to catch and sell wild caught reptiles, it seems they don't realize that the whole basis of the hobby was at one point "keep what you catch" where you would swap other keepers for different species.
I see the licensing system as nothing more than just another way to create revenue under the guise of animal protection or preservation. When was the last time you heard anyone being charged or fined for killing a reptile unjustly? Yet there have been private keepers who have been fined for not writing another reptile keeper's details in the logbook straight away....it seems more than a little hypocritical.

 

[Tobe404]

Who is to say it's okay for someone to bring in a wild caught animal and not someone else? I don't understad. Who's to say a big company/breeder has more knowledge then the average person? It isn't always the case.
Just how I feel about things.
Especially when you pay for five years of a basic keep and sell licence and they can't make out the difference when you want to upgrade it to an advanced one. So you lose 2-3 years worth.

 

[ingie]

You are generalising wildlife care and rehab, by saying things like "if you can rehab in a short time......etc" That's not always the case. Wildlife rehab is or should be done on a case by case scenario, if the carer is good and keeps the patient away from other animals and nice and clean, it doesn't matter how long you keep it for before returning to the bush.
Many, many reptiles are now kept on licence that were brought in as injured or out of area animals, and they do just fine. You would probably be amazed at the ability of reptiles to heal when given the right conditions, and this is probably because they don't have the emotional scarring of mammals that is a burden. Can a mammal survive amputation in the wild without human intervention?
Also, reptiles that are "just genetically weak,and not meant to go on and reproduce" are only found in the hobby! Not the wild.

It isn't the general length of time people keep things that I don't agree with, if the animal is going well and isn't suffering, then it doesn't bother me at all. Perhaps I worded my opinion poorly. I don't agree with it when people drag out painful/stressful treatment of any kind of animal, because they want it to live at all costs, even though it has poor quality of life and may be living for long periods of time in extreme fear, state of extreme hormonal agression, constant pain and illness that isn't going to improve or stop being painful, but they are able to be kept "alive", and people refuse to see that PTS is a more humane action than stringing on something that is really suffering. This is probably more relevant to mammals actually, as I see you have a valid point with reptiles coping and healing very well with injuries, as they are adapted to survive being chomped and having missing bits etc.

There sure are genetically weak animals in the wild as well as in captivity. They will be picked off in the wild if left to their own devices, but with human intervention I imagine some could persist.

 

[ingie]

I guess I should be talking about the original topic I am glad you have to have a permit to collect wild caught animals, as just look at the number of members on this site alone, and imagine how many people would be collecting from the wild to fill their collections now, compared to when the hobby first started and there were no restrictions. There would be none of some things left! Even though the average person wouldn't know where to start or have any hope of catching the more elusive and remotely located species, they could pay someone else to do it if it was something they just had to have, and it wasn't available anywhere else.

 

[borntobnude]

Does this not come down to the vet that would be treating said animal? I would of thought a vet would recognise if an animal is beyond saving it it would be put down.


Rick

this is off topic but
we owned a Blue Persian ( not a show cat that had its face bred flat ) that developed lumps under his arms and chin --Cancer -- as such . took him to the local vet and he wanted to prescribe tablets @ $ 400 a month that "may "help . went to another vet ---" Sorry but its time to say goodbye to your cat ". I appreciate every thing that vets do but sometimes it is just Emotional Blackmail

 

[cement]

It isn't the general length of time people keep things that I don't agree with, if the animal is going well and isn't suffering, then it doesn't bother me at all. Perhaps I worded my opinion poorly. I don't agree with it when people drag out painful/stressful treatment of any kind of animal, because they want it to live at all costs, even though it has poor quality of life and may be living for long periods of time in extreme fear, state of extreme hormonal agression, constant pain and illness that isn't going to improve or stop being painful, but they are able to be kept "alive", and people refuse to see that PTS is a more humane action than stringing on something that is really suffering. This is probably more relevant to mammals actually, as I see you have a valid point with reptiles coping and healing very well with injuries, as they are adapted to survive being chomped and having missing bits etc.

There sure are genetically weak animals in the wild as well as in captivity. They will be picked off in the wild if left to their own devices, but with human intervention I imagine some could persist.

This is right, you would have to be inhuman to keep a suffering animal alive just so a person could a sense of whatever. Thankfully it doesn't happen to often.
Mostly, I come across people who genuinely feel for the victim but don't have the strength, skills or the knowledge to make the call about euthing. Many people also just simply do not want to carry out the act of killing something, even if it is for mercy. It is by far the worst part of wildlife work.