In the midst of attention and eccentricity, exotic pet owners often find themselves attracted to the unique appearance, fascinating originations, and the exclusiveness of peculiar animals. Despite the alleged superiority of owning an exotic pet, owners often find themselves unable to fulfill their promise to care for their once small, irresistible pet. These animals should not be left to invade the indigenous species of their states, but instead should be taken into rescue organizations that will indeed uphold their responsibility. Therefore, the ownership of exotic animals should be restricted because these pets often become burdensome to manage, demand diligent responsibility, and pose as dangers. Of highest importance to the restriction
…show more content…
Although simplistic, domesticated pets also require appropriate provision, health care, and resources, foreign pet’s exclusive distinctions demand an augment of time, money, and resources. For instance, Lewis states, “ It’s not just the food an the vet bills… You also have to build a sturdy cage or enclosure that is the appropriate size … and play spaces to approximate the animal’s natural habitat” (104). Furthermore, the increased investments and resources necessary for the well-being and safety of the animal will provoke a gradually unappealing responsibility in the owner. As explained by Lewis, exotic pets are lifelong commitments that’s very survival is dependent on the devotion and liability of human beings, a primary reinforcer that isn’t always available (104). While some owners may be competent enough to care for an animal in its formative years, the accompanying augmented responsibilities will surely cause the inevitable to occur; the animal’s release into the wild. A multitude of people believe that the government's restriction on the ownership of exotic pets is wrongful and misleading because “animals are personal property”; however, this is a mere fallacy. According to Polly Britton, Secretary of the Ohio Association of Animal Owners, states, “Animals are personal property; and we oppose legislation that restricts the private ownership or use of animals…”(REXANO
Although simplistic, domesticated pets also require appropriate provision, health care, and resources, foreign pet’s exclusive distinctions demand an augment of time, money, and resources. For instance, Lewis states, “ It’s not just the food an the vet bills… You also have to build a sturdy cage or enclosure that is the appropriate size … and play spaces to approximate the animal’s natural habitat” (104). Furthermore, the increased investments and resources necessary for the well-being and safety of the animal will provoke a gradually unappealing responsibility in the owner. As explained by Lewis, exotic pets are lifelong commitments that’s very survival is dependent on the devotion and liability of human beings, a primary reinforcer that isn’t always available (104). While some owners may be competent enough to care for an animal in its formative years, the accompanying augmented responsibilities will surely cause the inevitable to occur; the animal’s release into the wild. A multitude of people believe that the government's restriction on the ownership of exotic pets is wrongful and misleading because “animals are personal property”; however, this is a mere fallacy. According to Polly Britton, Secretary of the Ohio Association of Animal Owners, states, “Animals are personal property; and we oppose legislation that restricts the private ownership or use of animals…”(REXANO