Quote:
Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly  Thank you for your kind words about little Jilly. I took Jilly, the runt of the litter from a breeder I long knew, who'd hand-raised her, saving her for herself or for a very savvy caregiver with lots of time on their hands - me, in other words. My first Yorkie, Scotty, was also a tiny, 3 lbs. and quite healthy, though I didn't know a thing about Yorkies when I got him! So naturally I wanted another just like him, though I had learned the constant watch and worry involved with a tiny was a real job! I was well-informed and well-versed at all the nurturing, time, wads and wads of money, nursing duties and worry that might be involved with a tiny runt and still it was painful and soul-wearying to see Jilly suffer over and over or try to do things she was too frail to do. Tiny, fragile things don't always live very happy lives but boy, she tried with every fiber of her tiny being. Still, I wouldn't wish her life on anyone or anything. With a tiny, the chances of getting a dog with health and fragility problems are far greater than that of a full-sized Yorkie, a very small dog anyway.
Sad, sad story about the turtle's life in that too-tiny tank! Poor thing. Totally stymied in its little wild heart to 2.5 gallons of 'life'. Poor little creature. Like those poor fish in tiny round bowls! Ugh! And like wild zoo animals confined to cages or 'enclosures' rather than the savage, open savanna, free to run, roam and wander, forage, hunt and migrate for change of food sources, mates and scenery at will, not walk the few yards of its caged/fenced area, be it small or large, it's still confined, a complete prisoner, not a free wild thing as its heart yearns to be. So sad that many people seem to put their wants first, not the needs of the animals sadly restricted to our care and custody. |
Sounds like you gave that dog a piece of heaven though.
I am glad she lived with someone who cared for her as much as you did.
As for enclosures, I agree somethings shouldn't be enclosed, unless you can cover their typical use of space. For example a totally random animal but let's take I don't know-- a pacman frog as long as it's space needs are met they are fine. For there are animals that don't like to stray or wander far... Pac man frogs are ambush predators and as such they tend to pick one spot and they do not move from that spot much.
You could give it a large enclosure and I will tell you right now it will sit in one corner all of the time, only moving to switch locations, sit in water or eat.
As they burrow into the dirt and wait for signs of movement before attacking.
Animals like that are very much fine in confinement if not it's probably godsend for them. To my belief at least, because of the lack of predators.
Animals that enjoy a lot of movement wouldn't be that happy in close quarters.
Snakes are fine in their enclosures as they generally like to be in tight spaces to begin with and are happy anywhere that is warm, and has enough food.
Things like bears, badgers, and other nomadic animals would do well in larger enclosures than the average zoo gives them.
Animals like lions while they enjoy having their space they all like to stay in their own territory. Usually about 100 square miles or more.
While some animals I feel sad to see in captivity, there are some that do well in captivity like certain endangered species. For the betterment of the species.
But yes, that is typically the case from what I've seen... people tend to only put their wants first even if it hurts something else. But I am rather a cynic so that's just taken with a grain of salt.