• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Can snakes be fed a vegan diet?

amazondoc said:
That's right. But it isn't what we "exist for".
Click to expand...
Oh, this is about to get reeeeaaaallleeeeeeeeee good!!!

Popcorn.jpg


Just what is it that we "exist for" almighty, fancy schmancy, vege-what-ever-you-choose-to-make-yourself-feel-better-arian, know-it-all troll??

D80
 
Drizzt80 said:
Just what is it that we "exist for" almighty, fancy schmancy, vege-what-ever-you-choose-to-make-yourself-feel-better-arian, know-it-all troll??
Click to expand...

Wow, no need to get nasty.

I don't think we "exist for" anything in particular. It is not my purpose in life to be eaten by a tiger.
 
wilomn said:
Do the wolves and tigers, not to mention sharks and polar bears and cougars, both kinds, and a number of other carnivores know this or is it just you saying so because you don't favor being a main course?
Click to expand...

The wolves etc. would eat me if they had a chance, because they are hungry and they have no ethical awareness. But it is not my purpose in life to be eaten by them.
 
The only "purpose" for life is to survive long enough to reproduce itself. This includes eating other things unless you are a plant or photosynthesizing organism. That said, it is *natural* for humans and many other organisms to be eaten by apex predators. There's nothing about it that needs to bring ethics into play. If I go hiking and get eaten by a bear, well that certainly sucks for me but I'd hope people wouldn't get all up in arms about it.

I, as a human, am a prey species. I acknowledge this. I am also a predator/scavenger to some degree. Mice are entirely a prey species. They are used by a lot of different creatures as a food source as they attempt to fill their "purpose".
 
Shiari said:
The only "purpose" for life is to survive long enough to reproduce itself. This includes eating other things unless you are a plant or photosynthesizing organism. That said, it is *natural* for humans and many other organisms to be eaten by apex predators. There's nothing about it that needs to bring ethics into play. If I go hiking and get eaten by a bear, well that certainly sucks for me but I'd hope people wouldn't get all up in arms about it
Click to expand...

Right. I'm pretty much with ya.

Ethics don't come into play between non-human species, or when a non-human does something to a human. Ethics are only involved when a *human* acts.
 
Catching up on a couple of posts I missed earlier --

Emily1188 said:
I view it as a matter of relativism... Do I think my dog is more valuable than a chicken intended for consumption? Yes, of course I do. Is my dog's life intrinsically more valuable than a chicken's life? No, but she's my dog, and therefor valuable to me.
Click to expand...

I personally believe that a dog's life IS more intrinsically valuable than a chicken's life, because the dog has a more complex brain and is capable of more complex perceptions than the chicken. Therefore, I personally believe that it matters more when a dog is killed than a chicken. Nonetheless, I wouldn't personally eat either one unless it was a matter of survival.
 
Lucille said:
So, let's take this conversation down another path, do you have any feelings about consuming people? If not, do you respect that others do so?
Click to expand...

As long as the person is already dead, not killed for the purpose, then ethically I don't personally see a problem with eating the body. It's killing that bothers me ethically, not the way in which the flesh is disposed of.
 
Which peta brochure are you reading from? You're going to spew ethics when talking about killing things yet you cage animals. Whatever makes you feel better sport.

D80
 
A question for amazondoc:

I am going to assume you are a vegetarian, from what you said about eating chickens. I am also going to assume that you chose this diet based on ethics. If any of these assumptions are wrong, please disregard the rest of my post, as it will be irrelevant.

Do you see as ethical, then to support the pet reptile trade? After all, if you do not buy or breed snakes in captivity, you will reduce the number of rodents that die to provide captive reptiles with food. And since rodents are definitely capable of more complex perceptions than a snake, isn't it wrong to kill them to feed snakes? And since snakes in captivity have to eat, isn't the answer to simply not support keeping them in captivity?
 
Emily1188 said:
I am going to assume you are a vegetarian, from what you said about eating chickens.
Click to expand...

As I've already explained a couple of times in this thread, I am no longer vegetarian. I was ovo-lacto vegetarian for more than 20 years, but for the last several years I have also eaten seafood.

I am also going to assume that you chose this diet based on ethics.
Click to expand...

This part is absolutely accurate.

Do you see as ethical, then to support the pet reptile trade?
Click to expand...

I'm conflicted on this issue. One of the main reasons I did not keep snakes for about 20 years is the issue of feeding. OTOH, not all herps need warm-blooded prey. Heck, egg-eating snakes (genus Dasypeltis) don't even have teeth!

After all, if you do not buy or breed snakes in captivity, you will reduce the number of rodents that die to provide captive reptiles with food. And since rodents are definitely capable of more complex perceptions than a snake, isn't it wrong to kill them to feed snakes? And since snakes in captivity have to eat, isn't the answer to simply not support keeping them in captivity?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. These concerns are important to me. But as with many things in life, I don't have a good answer to them at the moment. They do, however, form an important basis for my thoughts about feeding the wild mice rather than the domestic ones.
 
amazondoc said:
Oh, no, that is not a problem in my case. I'm on a farm, I have lots of animals, and I absolutely do not use any poisons of any type aside from medicinal ones used for routine internal parasite control and such.
Click to expand...
See, I wouldn't want to be feeding my snakes on food that's been eating coccidostat-laced feeds, for example, either. I'm very careful when I buy my rodent feed (as I breed my own) NOT to buy feeds that contain antibiotics/wormers/etc. They haven't been tested on or for the safety of snakes.

amazondoc said:
I'll argue with you on the omnivorous ones. "Omnivorous" animals, by nature, can live on any of a wide variety of foods. Just because an animal *can* eat meat doesn't mean it has to.....
Click to expand...
Omnivorous doesn't mean "can survive and thrive on a purely herbivorous diet" - it means "adapted to eat BOTH vegetable AND animal sources of food". An omnivore needs both to be healthy in the long term, not one or the other.

And I say that knowing (omnivorous-by-nature) humans who eat nothing but ground muscle meat and fat (which I am not sure is healthy) .... and (omnivorous-by-nature) humans who eat nothing but processed vegetable proteins (and again, I'm not convinced THAT is healthy either).

I'd say I'm approximately 75% animal-food / 25% vegetable-food at the moment, and that balance suits my digestion. I wouldn't thrive on a 100% plant-based diet, not least because I can't digest grains very well.

Lucille said:
So, let's take this conversation down another path, do you have any feelings about consuming people? If not, do you respect that others do so?
Click to expand...
I know this question wasn't aimed at me, but...

I have a rather unorthodox approach. Once something living is dead, meat is meat. It is a longstanding joke at work that if we went on a work experience and crashed in the Andes, presuming I survived the crash, I would still be standing when rescue arrived. That's because I wouldn't have a problem with eating whatever food was available, even if that's long pork - as long as I didn't have to kill someone to get it.

My ethical objection to cannibalism is whether I have the right to *kill* someone for food - not whether I should eat them once they're dead. Now, my *logical* objection to cannibalism is how long you'd have to cook it to make sure everything that's infectious-to-humans is dead.

And yeah, if we crashed in the Andes and I *didn't* survive, I would want the people I spend 8 hours a day of my life with to use the tools they have in order to ensure THEY survive - even if that means noshing on my body. I'm not in there any more, what do I need it for?
 
Ssthisto said:
See, I wouldn't want to be feeding my snakes on food that's been eating coccidostat-laced feeds, for example, either.
Click to expand...

And that's a valid concern. Only my chicks get medicated feeds, but it's a good thing to worry about.

An omnivore needs both to be healthy in the long term, not one or the other.
Click to expand...

No they don't. At least, humans and dogs don't. For instance, there are whole colonies/communes of humans that are raised vegan/vegetarian from birth (for one example look up "The Farm", in Summertown right here in TN), and grow up to be perfectly healthy adult human beings. And vegetarian diets have become so popular for dogs these days that even the big chain stores carry them. I don't feed *my* cats or dogs on vegetarian diets, but it can be done.

As for the cannibalism question, I'm absolutely with ya.
 
amazondoc...why burden yourself with all these conflicts. just don't own snakes and your problem is solved. Trying to weigh the pros and cons of feeding snakes your wild barn rodents is a no brainer. You'll introduce parasites, internal and or external by doing so. What is ethical about intentionally infecting something? Duh
 
I just really don't see how people think of these kinds of things....::shrugs:: I'm sorry but even on my most boring day at work..the very last thing on my mind would be if I could turn my snake to a vegan diet..Why...I mean...seriously....why??????

IDK...I very rarely question people's thoughts on here..but this one just threw me off a bit..
 
amazondoc said:
That's one option!
Click to expand...

It seems to me that if you believe all the aforementioned statements about the cognitive abilities of rodents vs. snakes and the value of life, it's the only option and that seems pretty obvious. Feeding them wild mice is still killing mice that don't need to die, if snakes simply aren't kept in captivity.

Otherwise, what I'm hearing is this: "I see an ethical problem with the feeding of snakes in captivity, but despite this, I enjoy keeping them and so will continue to do so for my own pleasure."

It just seems like the clear and easy answer for you, ethically, is to not keep snakes. The only conflict is that you enjoy keeping them.

So is your pleasure, as a highly cognitive being capable of a vast array of emotions and thought processes, more valuable than the life of a mouse?
 
Emily1188 said:
It seems to me that if you believe all the aforementioned statements about the cognitive abilities of rodents vs. snakes and the value of life, it's the only option and that seems pretty obvious. Feeding them wild mice is still killing mice that don't need to die, if snakes simply aren't kept in captivity.
Click to expand...

No, the wild mice have to go anyway -- with or without snakes being present.

Otherwise, what I'm hearing is this: "I see an ethical problem with the feeding of snakes in captivity, but despite this, I enjoy keeping them and so will continue to do so for my own pleasure."

It just seems like the clear and easy answer for you, ethically, is to not keep snakes. The only conflict is that you enjoy keeping them.

So is your pleasure, as a highly cognitive being capable of a vast array of emotions and thought processes, more valuable than the life of a mouse?
Click to expand...

Oooo, you're tough. I like you! :)

I think you've got a pretty good handle on the conflict. I would also add the ethical value of the snakes' lives apart from my personal enjoyment of them, as an added weight to the "pro" side -- but I think you've got the general idea.

For about 20 years I came down on the "con" side. This winter I fell back onto the "pro" side. I don't know which side I'll end up on in the long run.....but, since I have already purchased enough frozen rodents to last several months, I have already committed my "sins" for the near future and have some time to figure it out.

Thanks for the discussion. It helps to bounce these ideas off folks with other perspectives!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top