This should never have happened
Detail:
It appears that there is a small but growing demand for monkeys as pets, fuelled (as always) by Hollywood blockbusters and television shows. The fall-out for this trend is a growing number of primates placed into rescue centres, many of them suffering psychological damage.
According to The Guardian, the RSPCA and Wild Futures, a Cornwall-based sanctuary that cares for distressed primates, have noted an increase in numbers. Although no official figures exist on the numbers of primates in the country – which is not surprising considering some of that trade is a result of illegal breeding and activities – a dealer was reported to have told the RSPCA that there are about 20,000 pet primates in the UK. The cost for one marmoset can hit £800, while potential owners will have to fork out £2,000 for a capuchin.
Part of this growth is a result of recent changes to the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976, in which the government removed a number of smaller primates from the dangerous animals list, meaning they can be bought and sold freely.
When this amendment was announced slightly more than two years ago, refuge centres and the RSPCA warned that more people would be tempted to take on an exotic pet without understanding the intricate care required, and that their centres would be swamped with abandoned animals.
Today, Wild Futures has 23 monkeys in its care, and all are suffering from poor mental health.
The sanctuary’s Liz Tyson had said: “The use of non-human primates as ‘actors’ would suggest to the viewer that they can live alongside people, that they can be dressed up, trained to perform amusing tricks and can be manipulated to entertain us. This leads to a distorted image whereby they become viewed as domestic companion animals, rather than the wild animals that they are.”
In an attempt to address the problem, the government will publish guidelines next month making it clear what is expected of primate owners when it comes to caring for their pets.
Great. Once again, with hindsight, the government has realised it has made a mistake and is trying to rectify the problem. Surely this attempt will go the same route as any proposal for self-regulation? If someone chooses to disregard a ‘guideline’, they will. And chances are those who disregard the guidelines are precisely those who obtained a primate for all the wrong reasons in the first place.
Now I may be sticking my neck out here, but what on earth does an individual want with a primate in the first place? I personally think the amendment to the Act should never have gone through and that monkeys belong in the wild, zoos or conservation projects. Simple as that. Primates are not pets and the sooner this message sinks in, the better for the welfare of these animals.
The only people benefiting from this are the breeders and dealers.
As it is, owning primates as pets is already banned in many countries including Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands. And calls are gathering to adopt a similar ban here in the UK.
And I, for one, agree with this.
According to The Guardian, the RSPCA and Wild Futures, a Cornwall-based sanctuary that cares for distressed primates, have noted an increase in numbers. Although no official figures exist on the numbers of primates in the country – which is not surprising considering some of that trade is a result of illegal breeding and activities – a dealer was reported to have told the RSPCA that there are about 20,000 pet primates in the UK. The cost for one marmoset can hit £800, while potential owners will have to fork out £2,000 for a capuchin.
Part of this growth is a result of recent changes to the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976, in which the government removed a number of smaller primates from the dangerous animals list, meaning they can be bought and sold freely.
When this amendment was announced slightly more than two years ago, refuge centres and the RSPCA warned that more people would be tempted to take on an exotic pet without understanding the intricate care required, and that their centres would be swamped with abandoned animals.
Today, Wild Futures has 23 monkeys in its care, and all are suffering from poor mental health.
The sanctuary’s Liz Tyson had said: “The use of non-human primates as ‘actors’ would suggest to the viewer that they can live alongside people, that they can be dressed up, trained to perform amusing tricks and can be manipulated to entertain us. This leads to a distorted image whereby they become viewed as domestic companion animals, rather than the wild animals that they are.”
In an attempt to address the problem, the government will publish guidelines next month making it clear what is expected of primate owners when it comes to caring for their pets.
Great. Once again, with hindsight, the government has realised it has made a mistake and is trying to rectify the problem. Surely this attempt will go the same route as any proposal for self-regulation? If someone chooses to disregard a ‘guideline’, they will. And chances are those who disregard the guidelines are precisely those who obtained a primate for all the wrong reasons in the first place.
Now I may be sticking my neck out here, but what on earth does an individual want with a primate in the first place? I personally think the amendment to the Act should never have gone through and that monkeys belong in the wild, zoos or conservation projects. Simple as that. Primates are not pets and the sooner this message sinks in, the better for the welfare of these animals.
The only people benefiting from this are the breeders and dealers.
As it is, owning primates as pets is already banned in many countries including Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands. And calls are gathering to adopt a similar ban here in the UK.
And I, for one, agree with this.
By:
Sandra
Date/time :
06/04/2010
Replies to this topic...
