Wild and Dangerous (Lies): The (Misrepresented) World of Exotic Pets
Earlier this year in January, completely unbeknownst to me, my spotted genet ‘Fuffy’ made his television debut in an episode of the Canadian documentary series called Doc Zone, Wild and Dangerous: The World of Exotic Pets directed by Jason Young.
This episode caused a stir in the exotic animal advocacy Facebook groups (one featured exotic pet owner had to demand that they remove fake roaring sounds from the clip of her lion shown in the advertisements), but the show’s website made the episode inaccessible to Americans. So most of us, including the featured guests, couldn’t see it . . . until now.
By pure chance after the episode had left my memory, I stumbled upon another upload of the documentary and I was dumbfounded, to say the least, to see the lazy ignorance it presented and the unauthorized use of my and others' Youtube footage of our pets. It was juxtaposed with nasty accusations toward exotic pet owners, essentially suggesting we are too dense to realize we shouldn’t have our animals and that they shouldn’t live with us, by an incomprehensibly challenged PhD.
By far, the biggest crime of Wild and Dangerous is the fact that it is masquerading as a ‘balanced’ documentary.
Operating with a premise that pegs exotic pet owners as naïve, foolish, egoists desperate for 'status', the narrative essentially poses the loaded question, what drives these people to do something so dangerous and unethical?
A write up on the doc states:
'We get the deep emotional bonds we form with cats and dogs, but what’s going on with people who choose exotic and often risky animals as pets? Do exotic and dangerous animals offer a unique emotional connection? Something we can’t get from other humans or traditional pets?'
I have some better questions. Why are 'traditional' pets the only acceptable pets to have? Why is every non-dog and cat animal presumed to be 'risky'? Why does the writer feel that only two species can offer a 'deep emotional bond' and why does everyone need to keep a pet for this vaguely-described purpose?
These questions will never be answered. You can expect a similar ludicrous approach to the subject of exotic pet ownership in Young’s failure of a documentary.
It offers little insight and intelligence, but a lot of berating by so-called ‘experts’ that mindlessly parrot (no pun intended) what they’ve learned about unique pets from (probably) the Humane Society of the United States and similar organizations. Everything said is ridiculously and easily refutable by anyone with a 3rd grade education.
This documentary is just one among many false media reports; a by-product of a cultural delusion against the ‘strange and unusual’ when it pertains to animals. The same reason there are idiots that kill every snake they see.
What Is the First Thing Wrong With This Documentary?
The title! Before the show even airs, it presents nonsense. It’s not that I can blame the show’s creators for failing to make logical conclusions as many do, but exotic pets are not ‘wild’, and they certainly aren’t all dangerous.
None of the featured exotic pet stories show any wild animals, but they do show non-domesticated animals that have been raised in captivity. Many people refer to them as ‘wild’ because their behaviors are unique to cats and dogs, but as I’ve written about extensively, this deduction makes little sense.
Many exotic pets certainly are dangerous to interact with, but the documentary repeatedly acknowledges the existence of non-dangerous exotic pets—parrots, my spotted genet, tarantulas, tamanduas, hedgehogs, etc. The keeping of the animals shown presents equivalent or significantly less danger than horseback riding.
Many are also less dangerous than a Japanese tosa, the dog breed that Young owns, which are deemed dangerous and are illegal in many countries including the UK. Only the big cats can be considered more dangerous than other typical hobbies, and only if they are interacted with.
Also, the episode is ostensibly covering the topic of ‘the exotic pet trade in Canada’, but many of the images and video (including mine) are not in Canada.
John Lussmyer, the featured cougar owner, lives in Greenbank, Washington, and Zuzana Kukol, owner of numerous large carnivores, lives in Pahrump, Nevada. Their failure to find even one big cat owner in Canada to feature reveals an immense hole in the documentary’s constant insinuation that the large and ‘dangerous’ exotic pets are typically owned.
In actuality, most big cat owners possess USDA licenses, and true private owners are extremely rare. In addition, it is overwhelmingly illegal in most states without a permit, and if not in the state, in most counties of that state. This is also true of Canada. The bans of larger carnivores often drag down with them smaller, non-dangerous species, all thanks to public sentiment powered by uneducated documentaries like these.
Balanced? What a Joke
While no exotic pet owner would believe this, an article states:
'So when making his documentary Wild & Dangerous: The World of Exotic Pets, airing on CBC TV’s Doc Zone on Thursday at 9 p.m., filmmaker Jason Young strove to present a balanced portrait and to create a bit of debate.'
When a documentary begins with the narrator (Ann-Marie MacDonald) declaring 'zoologists, vets, animal control experts, everyone says it’s a bad idea!' You know the filmmakers have their minds made up.
As exotic pet ownership is already unpopular to begin with, I wonder why the media has the need to repeatedly declare opposition to the subject with the same failed arguments as though they are providing an educative experience for viewers. Controversial topics like recreational marijuana, movements to legalize prostitution, and pushers of dubious medical treatments are often treated with more diligent respect.
In our ‘balanced’ documentary, exotic pet owners are continuously hammered upon by these two know-nothings; Dr. Beth Daily, professor and ‘pioneer’ of a new field called anthrozoology, and Dr. Ron Orenstein, an author and ‘conservationist’ who possesses a PhD in ornithology.
Both spout off spiteful comments throughout; our editor makes sure they get to dominate most of the speaking time. Orenstein, an avid bird watcher, declares that watching birds in captivity is nothing like doing so in the wild, and the documentary aids this statement, snarkingly, by showing a clip of wild birds forging and caged birds standing still. We’re not stupid.
We know caged birds and wild birds are different, but there is still a ton one can learn from animals that live with people. On the other side, you can only catch quick glimpses of wild birds before they soar away with ease. Captive exotic animals still express plenty of natural behaviors. And believe it or not, they stand still in the wild as well, perhaps less often when an ornithologist is stalking them.
'They’re NOT. GOOD. PETS. If it’s a dangerous animal, you are doing something of the equaivalant of keeping a hand grenade in your closet and hoping your neighbors don’t mind'.
Oh seriously, shut up. Who knows what Orenstein was referring to when he said this? But our 'balanced' documentary keeps piling on garbage like this whenever an exotic pet owner speaks.
Daily’s ignorance is evident during the showing of my clip—she actually speaks of hedgehogs, tigers, and monkeys in the same sentence, suggesting we are deluded in thinking we are taking 'wonderful care' of our animals, and that 'some animals should not be domesticated'.
Why should some animals, particularly African pygmy hedgehogs (which are hybrids and are technically domesticated already), not be ‘domesticated’? I would love her to give me one decent, non-laughable reason. These speakers seem to think that once dogs, cats, and guinea pigs were domesticated, we should stop there; everything else is off-limits. WHY? No one knows. People just don't think.
This is the same woman that is supposed to be teaching her students to 'think critically'.
No Clarity About the Illegal Wildlife Trade
Yasmin Nakhuda, the original owner of Darwin the ‘Ikea monkey’ before his custody was granted to a greedy sanctuary, should be very offended that the documentary basically suggested she obtained her animal from the illegal wildlife trade, and it is always emphasized that the trade is a billion-dollar industry behind drugs and guns and human trafficking, again and again, as though they are hoping we will be seen as criminals, traveling to 'hoods', standing by a corner and waiting for someone to make the 'drop' of our new pets.
Many fail to understand that the vast majority of exotic pets are captive bred (except for marine fish and invertebrates), and this is especially true of mammals.
Animals like Darwin do not 'often' come from the illegal wildlife trade—just like your dog or cat, they are born in captivity, often by other private owners and even zoos. In fact, zoos often get their animals from private owners! Like these two hyenas, now living at the AZA-accredited Denver Zoo, that hail from the same facility I am buying a new pet from!
The documentary proceeded to show alarming photos of animals like chimps, tiger cubs, and cheetahs in small cages, and this has no basis in reality for the pet trade in North America. Even an aye aye is shown. The reason evades me.
Slow lorises are also not impacted by the North American pet trade. Have you ever seen a slow loris in an American household? No? I wonder why? The famous viral video with the loris being scratched takes place in Eastern Europe. The documentary does not inform the viewer of any of this. It constantly implies that large mammals are routinely smuggled, even showing two miniature horses in a crate, which I’m pretty sure are not exotic animals.
- 10 Myths about Exotic Pet Ownership
Clearing up some rampant misinformation about exotic pets perpetuated by animal rights groups and ignorance.
The Public Safety Risk Lie
'Aside from conservation, aside from animal welfare, aside from all the kinds of issues that get me going, one of the biggest concerns that I think people everywhere should have about exotic pets is public safety'.
Orenstein rails on. Two little boys were killed by a python. So what? It was a shocking, horrendous, heartbreaking tragedy. What else is new? Tragedies occur all the time. At the time of this writing, seven people died in another train accident close to where I live. Whether or not this was due to negligence, it is an isolated incident.
It doesn’t mean that trains are dangerous. Even cars, the most common mode of transportation of which people perish, are not considered dangerous. So why, WHY do we have to get beat over the head with these rare tragedies like the CT Chimp mauling and the Zanesville, Ohio shootings? Young, with his ‘dangerous’ dog breed, should know this better than anyone. Please, let’s stop this nonsense. It defies logic. There IS. No. Public. Safety. Threat. With. Exotic. Animals. As I have repeatedly shown.
No one cares about conservation enough to make free-roaming pet cats and TnR programs illegal, so as far as I’m concerned, case closed. Conservation is only an issue when the invasive species aren’t cuddly traditional pets, and I’m deathly tired of the ‘argument’ that some exotic pets are released or have escaped into the wild when we have movements to protect feral animals that damage the ecosystem like wild horses.
Arbitrary conservation is not conservation, and I would love for people to come down to Earth and give it a real try. But until then . . .
What’s the Line Between Wild and Domesticated?
My favorite subject. What is the line? Domestication is entirely arbitrary. There does exist a ‘domestication phenotype’, responsible for some similarities among domesticated species such as floppy ears and neotenic features, but most people think any tame-ish animal that is common in captivity is domesticated.
While the domestication process can make animals more simple for humans to manage in captivity, it doesn’t REMOVE their instincts. They are still animals, just more convenient for humans to live with or farm.
Some so-called wild animals do not need to be domesticated, they are suitable for captivity just the way they are! Cockatiels are a good example. As long as they are reared by humans (and this goes for cats as well) they are not ‘wild’ and will be relatively tame.
Young stated that production on his documentary 'opened my eyes to negative issues around exotic pets and it worries me'. Well, of course, he's worried, he's peddling the same myths that I've debunked in a recent article.
Between talking to 'experts', one of which was duped into buying a pet 'wolf' that's actually a malamute, taking in lie after lie, how could he not boo hiss exotic pet owners? As well as everyone else. This is what we have to deal with. This is the REAL world of exotic pets. Baseless attacks to our lifestyle with garbage claims. But Mr. Fuff Fuff was on TV, COOL!!
This article is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge. Content is for informational or entertainment purposes only and does not substitute for personal counsel or professional advice in business, financial, legal, or technical matters.