Pet Reptiles-Are We Meeting Their Needs?

Alexandre Azevedo,Manuel Magalhães-Sant’Ana,Martin Whiting,Joel Ferraz,Leonor Guimarães

doi:10.3390/ani11102964

Alexandre Azevedo, Manuel Magalhães-Sant’Ana + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11102964

Copy DOI

Abstract

Simple SummaryLittle is known about the ability of reptile owners to meet the needs of their pet animals. In this study, 220 pet reptile owners in Portugal reported their knowledge of reptile behaviors and the provision of essential husbandry needs (temperature, lighting, diet and refuge). Although two-thirds of respondents scored very good to excellent in terms of interpreting their pet reptile’s behaviors, 85% failed to provide at least one of the four husbandry needs. Moreover, behaviors indicative of poor welfare and captivity stress were considered ‘normal’ by some respondents. These results suggest that many pet reptiles in Portugal live in, at best, ‘controlled deprivation’ and are at risk of suffering poor welfare throughout their lives. Despite this, none of the respondents reported their reptile’s welfare as very poor, and a single respondent reported it as poor. We suggest that poor welfare and abnormal behaviors in pet reptiles have become accepted as normal, precluding the search for ways to prevent them. These results suggest that campaigns aimed at challenging the current norm for adequate reptile welfare are warranted. In particular, the predominant view, propelled by the exotic pet industry, that reptiles are low-maintenance pets needs to be actively refuted.The ability to meet the needs of each species in captivity is at the heart of the ethical debate on the acceptability of keeping reptiles and other animals as pets. Little is known about the ability of reptile owners to understand their pets’ behavior and to meet their welfare requirements. In this study, we surveyed pet reptile owners in Portugal (N = 220) to assess their behavioral knowledge and the provision of essential husbandry needs. Although two-thirds of respondents (68%) scored very good to excellent in terms of knowledge of their pet reptile’s behaviors, only 15% of respondents met four essential reptile husbandry needs (temperature, lighting, diet and refuge) and 43% met two or less. None of the respondents reported their reptile’s welfare as very poor, and only a single respondent reported it as poor. Logistic regression model showed that while snake owners had fourteen times higher odds of reporting adequate husbandry provision, lizard owners had the highest odds of reporting good or very good welfare despite providing less of their animals’ basic husbandry needs. These results suggest that many pet reptiles in Portugal live in, at best, ‘controlled deprivation’ and are at risk of suffering poor welfare throughout their captive lives. Moreover, behaviors indicative of poor welfare and captivity stress were considered ‘normal’ by up to one quarter of respondents. We suggest that the frequency of these behaviors in pet reptiles has led to their acceptance as normal, precluding the search for ways to prevent them. These results suggest that campaigns aimed at challenging the current norm for adequate reptile welfare are warranted.

Highlights

The ability to meet the needs of each species in captivity is at the heart of the ethical debate on the acceptability of keeping exotic pets [1,2,3]
We predicted that owners would be largely unskillful at interpreting normal and abnormal reptile behaviors and that husbandry needs essential to the survival of pet reptiles would not be met
Our results show that owners are capable of recognizing behaviors associated with poor welfare but seem to accept them as normal, which highlights a potential strategy for campaigns to use a zoocentric approach which challenges the desensitization toward poor reptile welfare

Summary

Introduction

The ability to meet the needs of each species in captivity is at the heart of the ethical debate on the acceptability of keeping exotic pets [1,2,3]. The number of animals traded to allow this number of pets may exceed 24 million, given the reported first-year mortality estimates in homes that range from 3.6% [9] to 75% [10]. The large range of these estimates reflects an ongoing debate between those associated with the pet reptile industry, who claim mortality rates are low, and those questioning the acceptability of current practices, who propose that estimates are most likely underestimated due to the mortality rates during trade and deficient record keeping [4,11]. This claim does not seem to find support in the trade industry that, at least in some cases, refers to mortality rates as high as 70% as industry standard [2,11,14]

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion