Quote:
Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom  Catching up on this thread.
What really stood out to me was bolded, above. I think that's where we humans trip ourselves up - thinking that we can *think* like an animal would and then assume things about the captivity we force upon them.
We can't think like animals. So we should assume that tighter captivity for them is totally against their nature, rather than assuming it's something better for them.
An analogy: let's starve a human child of love. If the child never knew love existed - if it was non-existent to them...then should we just assume they just don't need it, want it, long for it (even if they can't define what "it" is?)....? I don't think so, personally. I think that every creature has instincts and needs that it's born with - both due to nature and nurture. Whether animal or human, severely limiting fulfillment of needs is unhealthy (mentally, physically) to that living being. |
True, I get what you're saying. I just don't think -some- animals even care. Specific ones though. Specifically speaking about already sedentary animals that will literary stay in the same spot for hours, on end without any movement. Like tarantulas, pac man frogs, maybe snakes, certain toads, a few species of turtles(but still in a big enclosure).
I am not saying cram them into a tiny space either, just saying it's all relative for certain things.
Some animals don't even have that evolved of a brain to even notice it... Do you think a tarantula knows what an enclosure is?