Saff has a problem taking the advcie she so often askes for Stu - poor shame of the meerkat I say!!

__________________


SITE NOT UP YET - PLEASE VIEW AT WWW.FREEWEBS.COM/GRACEFULCORSETRY/INDEX.HTM

Please sign the guestbook - feedback much appreciated

APOLOGIES FOR ANY PM'S I HAVE NOT REPLIED TO - SOME SAD PERSON ACCESSED MY ACCOUNT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION!

me cuddling my meerkat
sorry they are a bit big lol

__________________

I say LOL too much!

hope you like them!!
Saff xxxx

__________________

I say LOL too much!

I don't wanna repeat things that has been said, but it seems that the OP has selective "hearing" and only registers what she wants to.

The same thing is happening with sugar gliders, who NEED glider companionship, where people go out and buy just one. They say they'll get him/her a friend later on, but how long can a social animal go in solitary before self mutilating?

yes hes sweet, now go and get another one, because its not fair, human contact does not replace its own kind, no matter how much you try and convince yourself otherwise.

__________________

I get tired of this tbh.

I will get slammed by retail for saying this, but lest me first say to retail, this comment is not aimed at those that do what l suggest shortly, but to those who don't give a flying damn, and are as blind to animals rights as much as so many keepers apparently also are!!

Retailers, sellers alike have a responsibility, why oh why can you not recommend to each buyer of mammals that they have a keepers' responsibility to ensure that their animals rights are not neglected be this social or companionship!?

This means that instead of purely seeing the green on one, that you see the animals rights before the keepers?

I would rather decline a sale than just make the quick buck!

Sugar Lumps apply the same principal, for Sugar Gliders, many other independant sellers are applying the same principal, check, screen, vet who is buying what from you, not just bloody sell!

What about research? Have your buyers undertaken it? If not why the Frick not? Check them.

The antis love this kind of bullcrap, and at present Britsh mammal sellers feed directly into them.

Recently we have had an enquiry for a 6-12 week old Capuchin, well apart from the leading factor that they are not out there, l will most assuredly not accomadate this type of enquiry, nor will l sell to such an enquiry.

But l can almost guarantee that if some retailers had that available, they would sell, no questions about undertaken research or anything, but just see cash signs ringing in their heads.

I am more and more getting behind the premise of not allowing retailers to actually sell mammals, as they are lacking in the ability to sell to the right buyers.

But my respect does go to those in retail that do follow some kind of approved protocol and care about whom they are selling to. Sadly however, there does not appear to be many of you, and the problem for you, is that those retailers who do allow bad practice, tar you with their errors brush.

The same principal can be easily applied to other sellers of livestock, where we see no care being taken to ensure that the animals are going into the right locations, under the right responsibility.

Animals are way too disposable, and this is simply not acceptable.

"I will get one now, and then another later" is a blatant excuse and basically amounts to crap!

This industry will crumble, it will not be the fault of the genuine keeper who does everything in their power to ensure that their animals rights are adhered to, it will be down to the keepers who just want, and it will be down to the retailers who just want to hear the extra 'ting' on their cash register.

Slam away guilty retailers, slam away!!

Rory Matier
TSKA

__________________

wooh go rory!!!

i agree but at the end of the day ultimate responsibility is with the purchaser i feel personally YES retailer should refuse sale if someone is a stupid to ask for one meerkat or one cappuchin when they obviously need to be kept in groups BUT the owner should have done reserch asked for (and listened to) advice before undertaking getting an animal

__________________

And you are right Skimsa, it comes down to an equal share of responsibility, keepers must research, but sellers must screen.

The two will come together nicely when retailers/sellers alike realise that the person before them knows damn well what they are undertaking, and buyers will soon come to realise that unless they are displaying to the seller an understanding then nothing will be sold, and nothing will be bought.

R

__________________

and until people relise this and take responsibilty for their animals on both sides we're going to have these uneducated anti and foolish regulations

anyway politics 101 dismissed lol

__________________

This thread seems to be similar to talking to a brick wall. In the end Saff YOU are most probably affecting that animal in a negative way by keeping him without conspecifics.

It seems you are willing to ask the questions but ignore the answers, which is very irresponsible and childish on your part and ultimately unfair on the animal you are supposed to be 'caring' about. If you are goin to get another why not minimalise the damage and wait, save up (or ask mummy for the money) and get 2 at the same time, they are easy enough to find, even I know where I can get unrelated pairs and I know s**t all about them. But oh no, wait, that would be logical and involve absorbing the information given by experienced keepers....

I think I have PMT, so rant over......I don't mean to have a go but it infuriates me when you ask for advice and blatantley IGNORE it....

I agree with Rory though, there should be a responsibility with the seller to make sure the buyer has the right set up etc etc

__________________
Kate

2.2.2 - Eublepharis macularius0.1.0 - Sceloporus malachiticus 1.1.0 - Varanus acanthurus brachyurus0.0.1 - Tiliqua gigas evanescens 0.4.0 - Felis catus 1.0.0 - Fat, old goldfish
Lots of tropical fish...