This report was written and produced by OneKind, Scottish SPCA and Born Free. It is based largely on research carried out by Professor Samantha Hurn (University of Exeter) and our own monitoring of online sales and pet shop visits.
We wish to thank Lucy Colquhoun for her voluntary work monitoring online sales and recording data.
A note about language: the SAWC concluded that the term ‘exotic pets’ was potentially misleading and inappropriate, and suggested ‘non-domesticated animals in private keeping’ or ‘non-domesticated animals kept by humans’. Our research similarly found that many of these animals experience compromised quality of life in captivity because they retain wild characteristics, and that if they were more accurately called wild animals and not exotic pets, some people may think twice about acquiring them.
BACKGROUND
Key points
• Serious welfare concerns around the trade and private keeping of wild animals - ‘exotic pets’ - have been raised for decades.
• In 2022 the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission (SAWC) produced a report and recommendations on this issue. So far, the Scottish Government has not responded.
• There was limited evidence around how and why these animals are being kept and the extent to which their welfare needs are being met.
• We investigated online sales and pet shops, and commissioned research into the motivations and behaviours of those keeping wild animals. This report outlines our findings.
When the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission (SAWC) was formed, one of the first issues added to its workplan was the trade in and keeping of ‘exotic pets’ in Scotland.* This followed decades of advocacy and concerns raised by animal welfare organisations including OneKind, Scottish SPCA and Born Free, prompting the Scottish Government to commit in 2015 to reviewing the trade in and keeping of exotic pets.
In 2021 the SAWC produced an interim report, followed by a literature review and final report in 2022. Together, these highlighted that there is extensive trade and private keeping of wild animals (‘exotic pets’) in Scotland, with very little oversight. This lack of oversight or regulation means that sufficient evidence is lacking to provide reliable data on how many animals of which species are being traded and kept. As an indication, UK Pet Food (formerly known as the Pet Food Manufacturers’ Association) conducts annual surveys to estimate the scale of pet keeping. In 2024 it estimated that, across the UK, there were approximately 1.5 million indoor birds, 700,000 tortoises and turtles, and 600,000 snakes kept in homes, and that more than a fifth of homes had a fish tank.
The SAWC (2022) also found that there was limited evidence relating to how these animals are being kept, and the extent to which their welfare needs are being met. What was clear however was that, for many species currently being kept across Scotland, it is difficult or impossible to meet their needs in a typical home environment. These wild animals have a range of complex and specific needs, including, for example, exposure to natural and UVB light; to be able to burrow, climb, leap or fly; to be kept in appropriate, possibly large and/or dynamic social groups; and dietary requirements that are unknown or not easily met (for example species which primarily eat gums and sap).
Even for species whose needs are broadly known, those needs are too often not being met. The SAWC detailed additional concerns about breeding for rare colours or appearances (‘morphs’) in some species, and the lifelong harmful impact of flawed practices intended to tame young animals.
The SAWC commissioned literature review noted that: “Evidence of positive welfare, including the humananimal bond, is not often published, but is crucial to determine which animals make suitable pets.” (Oldham 2022)
Currently almost any species of animal can be legally kept, by anybody, so a change of legislation is needed. The SAWC (2022) stated that “It is our view that negative lists of species (the listing of those effectively ‘banned’ from being kept in captivity) are difficult to manage from a legislative and enforcement perspective due to the sheer breadth of species that can potentially be kept and substituted.”
As such, their key recommendation was that a single list of species that may legally be kept as pets should be introduced in Scotland, to replace the current ‘negative list’ approach. Such lists exist in other countries. They are referred to by various names, such as ‘positive’ or ‘white’ lists. They are also known as ‘permitted lists’. ‘Permitted list’ most accurately describes what the list is, so is the term used hereafter in this report.
We agree that a list should be introduced. A permitted list has the benefits of being clear, flexible, enforceable and future-proof. It is precautionary; only after consideration will a species be added to the list, in contrast to the current situation where many species are permitted to be kept when information on their suitability is lacking, and the listing of ‘banned’ species is reactionary, only after a problem is identified. All of these features mean that a permitted list will make protecting animal welfare easier for enforcement authorities and other stakeholders.
We are also aware that any legislative change will need to be accompanied by complementary measures to be successful. To help determine what those should be, we investigated online and pet shop sales, and commissioned research into the motivations and behaviours of those keeping wild animals in their home
Our report describes three key stages in the lives of those wild animals who are traded and kept as pets.
• The section on acquisition includes wild capture, captive breeding, transport and sale, as well as the motivations and behaviours of people acquiring wild animals.
• The section on life in captivity in the home highlights how many of these animals are treated as commodities, with concurrent welfare risks, and that many owners lack the knowledge or facilities to meet even their most basic needs.
• The section on disposal shows that many animals change hands multiple times and face an uncertain fate.
Our report is based primarily on our own in-house and commissioned research and also draws from other evidence, particularly the SAWC reports.
Our report helps to fill evidence gaps, reveals important, previously undocumented information about why and how people keep wild animals in their homes, and makes recommendations on how the Scottish Government should begin to tackle this animal welfare crisis.
Our focus in this report is animal welfare. There are numerous other risks created by the trade and keeping of wild animals – including zoonotic disease transmission, physical hazards to humans, the threat to the conservation of species in their native countries, and the impact on ecosystems in both the origin countries and in Scotland (when animals escape or are released) – that are not covered in this report but are additional reasons why this issue must be tackled urgently.
*A note about language: the SAWC concluded that the term ‘exotic pets’ was potentially misleading and inappropriate, and suggested ‘non-domesticated animals in private keeping’ or ‘non-domesticated animals kept by humans’. Our research similarly found that many of these animals experience compromised quality of life in captivity because they retain wild characteristics, and that if they were more accurately called wild animals rather than exotic pets, some people may think twice about acquiring them.
OUR RESEARCH
To inform this report and our recommendations we:
• Commissioned research into motivations, behaviours and experiences of people who keep wild animals at home, in Scotland and the rest of the UK. This included interviews and a ‘digital ethnography’ of online communities.
• Monitored online sales for a sixteen-week period in mid 2024.
• Sent an investigator into pet shops in 2024 posing as a potential shopper to assess the range of species, conditions they were kept in and retail staff knowledge and practices relating to the animals on sale.
GLOSSARY
CAGE SURFING Stereotypic movement along or up the walls of the enclosure.
CITES
DIGITAL ETHNOGRAPHY
ENRICHMENT
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. CITES aims to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten the survival of the species. It does this by regulating international trade in species listed on its Appendices through a permitting system.
In digital ethnography, researchers immerse themselves in the online environments ‘inhabited’ by their human research subjects.
Additions to a captive animal’s environment or life to try to stimulate interest and relevant behaviours and counteract the negative welfare impact of captivity.
FIVE DOMAINS See page 24.
FIVE WELFARE NEEDS
The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 places a duty of care on a person responsible for an animal to meet their needs: (a) for a suitable environment, (b) for a suitable diet, (c) to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns, (d) any need to be housed with, or apart from, other animals, (e) to be protected from suffering, injury and disease.
GLASS SURFING See cage surfing.
HUNGER STRIKE
IMPACTION
IMPRINTING
Reference to an animal not eating.
A blockage in the digestive system often caused by the ingestion of non-dietary items e.g. sand.
A rapid learning process that takes place early in the life of some species, and establishes a behaviour pattern, such as recognition of and attraction to the animal’s own kind or a substitute.
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature.
METABOLIC BONE DISEASE
MORPHS
NEGATIVE LIST
ONE HEALTH/ONE WELFARE
PERMITTED LIST
RACKS
Disorders typically arising as a result of dietary deficiencies and/or lack of environmental provisions which affect bone development and maintenance.
Specific colours or appearances that are sought after, and the result of breeding for certain traits.
A list of ‘banned’ species that are not legal to keep as pets.
Frameworks that recognise the links between the health and welfare of humans, other animals and the wider environment.
A list of species that can legally be kept as pets. Also known as ‘White list’ or ‘Positive list’.
Frames used to stack RUBs to house animals, particularly reptiles.
RUBS Really Useful Boxes: stackable plastic boxes used by some to house, transport or display reptiles.
SHELL PYRAMIDING
STEREOTYPIC BEHAVIOUR
STUCK SHED
Shell condition in tortoises, caused by poor diet or husbandry.
Repetitive, apparently functionless actions, which are usually a coping mechanism to deal with stress and/or frustration caused by a lack of stimulation and/or restriction of natural behaviours.
Problems with skin shedding in reptiles and exoskeleton shedding in invertebrates, caused by poor diet or husbandry.
ACQUISITION
It is far too easy for anyone to purchase large numbers of animals from diverse species, including those with very complex care needs. This leads to various animal welfare risks.
WILD CAPTURE
Key points
• Large numbers of animals are wild-caught to meet the demands of the pet trade, particularly for certain species.
• This can be driven by a demand for uncommon species. However, in some cases, even species that are widely captive bred continue to be wild-caught.
• There are many international sellers and couriers active on social media who facilitate this trade.
• The stress of capture, transport, sudden captivity and forced handling can cause lasting harm and death.
Some animals traded and kept by individuals are caught in the wild in their country of origin and transported to the UK. It is impossible to determine exactly how many but some indicative figures have been published previously. For example, it is estimated that around 90% of marine tropical fish sold in pet shops are wild-caught, and the Reptile and Exotic Pet Trade Association suggested that approximately 19% of reptile and amphibian sales are wild-caught (SAWC, 2021). There was also an indication made during our research that large numbers of birds are wild-caught for the pet trade.
Our research found that wild-caught animals are often sought due to interest in relatively uncommon species which are difficult to source or breed in captivity. The many international sellers and couriers active on social media suggests that acquiring animals, including wildcaught, from overseas is relatively easy. There were also examples of people obtaining wild-caught individuals with the plan to breed them, to fill a ‘gap in the market’ for a species that had, or could, become popular. However, even in the case of species that are easy to find captive bred in the UK, some people continue to import wild-caught animals. For example, royal (ball) pythons (Python regius) are frequently wild-caught, despite being widely kept and bred in the UK, and being one of the most common species entering rescue or being advertised for private rehoming.
The SAWC (2022) states that wild capture of animals for the pet trade is not justifiable on ethical or welfare grounds, and we agree. The stress of capture, transport, sudden captivity and forced handling can cause lasting harm. Wild-caught animals often demonstrate signs of trauma such as self-harming, fear-based aggression and stereotypic behaviours.
TRANSPORT
Key points
• The trade in wild animals as pets is international.
• Animals are shipped in unsuitable containers by couriers and sometimes arrive dead.
• This is in breach of animal transport regulations, but there is a lack of enforcement.
The trade in wild animals for pets is international, with animals regularly crossing regional and national borders. The transport frequently takes place with little or no attempt to safeguard animal welfare.
Almost all social media groups in the digital ethnography had animals being advertised for sale (often in open contravention of the social media platform’s policies) and many also contained posts from international sellers offering to source and ship a wide variety of species.
There were several examples of animals - mostly fish and invertebrates - but also reptiles and birds, being transported in unsuitable containers, sometimes without bedding or ventilation, and (in the case of some fish and invertebrates) being reported dead on arrival.
The British Veterinary Association (BVA) has also expressed concern about the shipping of animals by online retailers, noting that: “Although covered by animal transport regulations, there is no enforcement, with online fish suppliers in particular using Royal Mail and other couriers, even where this is specifically prohibited by those services” (BVA 2023).
Pet shop visits by a OneKind investigator identified a range of birds, reptiles and fish, as well as smaller numbers of amphibians and mammals, being sold.
In most cases our questions were answered thoroughly, and some good advice was given. There were examples of safeguards, such as shops requiring that people buy a ‘set-up’ (all of the equipment needed to house and care for the species) directly from them or show proof that they had one, before being allowed to purchase an animal. This demonstrates the potential advantages of in-person rather than online purchase.
However, the animals were typically spoken about as commodities and marketed accordingly. The advice given usually failed to impress upon the buyer the responsibility involved in keeping an animal, and all of the aspects they should consider. Many shop employees freely identified certain species as being “easy to keep” or “beginner friendly”, which is misleading as appropriate care for all animals requires species-specific knowledge and dedication.
When given the scenario of purchasing an animal as a gift for a ten-year-old nephew, none of the employees expressed concern, identified potential drawbacks, or suggested that the parents should be involved in the decision. Some recommended specific species while others suggested bringing the child in to choose his favourite.
In one shop a ‘quaker’ parrot (monk parakeet, Myiopsitta monachus) was described as a “great choice” for a ten-year-old, and “easy to look after”. Elsewhere, bearded dragons (Pogona vitticeps) were described as a “perfect reptile to get for a ten-year-old”.
In another, budgies (Melopsittacus undulatus) and cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) were described as easy to care for. When asked for details on care, the advice given was simply to clean the cage once or twice a week and feed and water daily, with the suggestion that a vet visit was only necessary if the animal appeared unwell. When asked if the cage was big enough, the answer was “yes, definitely” in contrast with an employee in a different shop who said “there is no such thing as a cage that is too big”.
Reptiles, especially snakes, were frequently kept in small plastic boxes (see page 15). Other enclosures, while meeting legal minimum sizes and generally clean and well-maintained, were still too small to meet the animals’ needs, and some were completely barren and devoid of enrichment.
Overall, the pet shops we visited met all legal requirements and, in some cases, gave good advice and welfare safeguards. However, the minimum standards and accepted norms within this trade are not sufficient to protect animal welfare.
SNAKE ENCLOSURE SIZES
The (UK) Animal Welfare Committee (AWC) published an opinion in 2023 to advise the UK and devolved governments on the minimum space requirements for snake enclosures in pet selling establishments (AWC 2023).
Their report provides some important and worrying context:
• Snakes are complex animals with detailed spatial memory, learning and problem solving.
• They are wild animals whose agency, exploration, and full range of natural behaviour cannot be expressed in captivity.
• They naturally inhabit large home ranges, up to 22 km2 for Burmese pythons (Python bivittatus), so their welfare is compromised in captivity.
• More than 25 behavioural signs of captivity related stress have been documented in snakes; these generally fall into one of two coping strategies, escape or hiding. Neither of these work in captivity, as the snake cannot escape, and hiding does not make the stress of confinement go away. This can lead to some snakes becoming hyperactive or shut down. Some of the manifestations of this, such as ‘hunger strikes’, were regularly seen in the digital ethnography in relation to various reptile species, and royal (ball) pythons in particular.
• Snakes also have a fundamental need for a variation in body temperature so a small enclosure with no temperature gradient will compromise welfare and lead to problems with shedding and refusing to eat.
Currently, under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Scotland) Regulations 2021, those selling snakes are allowed to keep them in vivaria, tanks, or boxes only 2/3 the length of the snake’s body. The AWC opinion stated that the minimum enclosure size for short term display should be 1x the snake’s length for the length of the enclosure, and 2/3 for the width.
They also stated clearly that such sizes would dramatically restrict movement and behaviour and “should never be considered as adequate in the long term.” They recommended a maximum of 14 days. This contrasts notably with the industry recommendations, which state that an enclosure 1 x snake length long and 1/2 snake length wide are suitable for permanent accommodation.
We found snakes of various species being kept in racks and RUBs, in both pet shops and homes. This practice is contested amongst keepers, with some recognising that it is harmful. Nonetheless, it is widespread and normalised, which is deeply worrying. Any animal kept in captivity should be able to move freely, explore and have some choice and control over their lives. Yet they are being kept in spaces so cramped that they cannot even stretch out.
Number of unique advertisements listed during a 16-week online sales monitoring period
Aberdeen City 19
Aberdeenshire 23
Angus 22
Argyll and Bute 6
City of Edinburgh 86
Clackmannanshire 19
Comhairle nan Eilean Siar 0
Dumfries and Galloway 19
Dundee City 23
East Ayrshire 34
East Dunbartonshire 5
East Lothian 23
East Renfrewshire 9
Falkirk 39
Fife 86
Glasgow City 294
Highland 22
Inverclyde 15
Midlothian 27
Moray 11
North Ayrshire 38
North Lanarkshire 57
Orkney 1
Perth and Kinross 36
Renfrewshire 44
Scottish Borders 15
Shetland Islands 0
South Ayrshire 8
South Lanarkshire 52
Stirling 29
West Dunbartonshire 24
West Lothian 38
Unknown 4
Shetland
Website
584 unique advertisments
Most popular for selling birds (359 adverts)
274 unique advertisments
Most popular for selling fish (117 adverts)
131 unique advertisments
139 unique advertisments
GUMTREE PRELOVED PETS4HOMES FREEADS
849 CITES-listed animals
(58 CITES Appendix I (international commercial trade prohibited), 776 CITES Appendix II (international commercial trade regulated) and 15 CITES Appendix III (national-level protection))
504 classified as threatened with extinction on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
(206 Vulnerable, 215 Endangered and 83 Critically Endangered)
Conservation status for 1,292 unknown
(Lack of information at a species level)
It should be noted that the websites have varying policies for which animals they allow to be advertised. Due to some species being prohibited across all four websites, such as primates, these were not identified in this strand of the research. However, this does not mean that these taxa are not being traded but may instead be being advertised on alternative websites. For example, the digital ethnography conducted for strand one of the research found numerous examples of primates being advertised for sale on platforms such as Facebook.
Gender
Owners identify as male, female, and nonbinary, usually with no particular trend. However, for some species, such as African pygmy hedgehogs, owners were more likely to be female, for others such as koi carp and raptors owners were more likely to be male.
Education and employment
Owners come from all educational backgrounds (from no formal qualifications through to PhDs), and work in a range of professions and jobs. Some are unemployed or retired.
There were many zookeepers represented in our research, suggesting that working with wild animals and wanting to keep them at home may be linked. Pet shop employees were another very large category of owners, again linked to both interest and easy access to animals, especially animals who were unlikely to be sold. This included ‘rescuing’ animals whose welfare they were concerned about in the pet shops where they worked.
Most owners encountered on social media appeared to have low socio-economic status.
Knowledge
Most people who own wild animals appear to be either irresponsible, or well-intentioned but lacking the necessary knowledge and equipment. A minority are responsible, highly knowledgeable, and provide a high standard of care.
WHAT MOTIVATES PEOPLE TO KEEP WILD ANIMALS AS PETS?
The objectification of these animals as commodities is one of the strongest themes emerging from our research. This manifests in various forms:
Cuteness: Regarding animals as cute is a very common motivation.
Aesthetics: Appreciation of the animals’ appearance is common. Importance is often placed on the ‘wildness’ and exoticism, and in some cases, rarity of both the species and morph.
Function: Certain species or categories are valued for their ability to serve a certain purpose, such as birds of prey used for hunting.
Impulse buying and convenience: Impulse buying is extremely common across almost all species. Some animals are acquired through convenience, such as having an extra tank to fill.
Collection, addiction and hoarding: Some owners keep lots of animals and see themselves as collectors. For some groups, such as reptile and amphibian keepers, this is widely discussed in terms of addiction and could in some cases represent a form of hoarding.
Unmet needs: For many owners, acquiring and keeping wild animals provides for a variety of otherwise unmet psychological needs (e.g. control, security, approval, validation, love).
Status: The vast majority of social media posts including images convey some sense of animals as status symbols.
Another theme identified amongst motivations relates to identity:
Species affiliation: Many people feel a very strong connection with certain species or individual animals.
Community: Communities become established around a passion for a certain species. Animals seem to be an extension of some people’s identities as part of sub-cultural groups, such as those with interests in gaming or comic books. The ‘otherness’ of some species also resonates with individuals who feel at odds with mainstream society in different ways.
Self-development: Some people feel that having direct physical experience of handling and/or caring for a wild animal is important to help them reconnect with the natural world. Others are trying to overcome phobias; fear or dislike of certain animals, surprisingly, does not necessarily prevent their ownership.
Neurodivergence: Our research suggests a high prevalence of neurodivergence within the wild animal keeping community, which is also noted by community members. It has been suggested that the focus and precise knowledge (of parameters like temperature and pH) required to maintain enclosures for wild animals fits well with many neurodivergent traits. Some studies have also suggested that neurodivergent children connect more easily with reptiles than mammals.
External influences appear to be a major driver of ownership:
Books: The Harry Potter books contributed to an increase of owls being bought as pets in Indonesia, most of which were wild-caught (Nijman & Nekaris 2017).
Films and TV: Red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans) became more popular after the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles series (Ramsay et al 2007).
Games: The game Minecraft popularised keeping axolotls (Ambystoma mexicanum) as pets (McClure 2022).
Social media influencers: This is a particularly strong driver of demand. Although there are some more responsible influencers, many seem to care little about animal welfare and promote harmful ideas and misinformation. Irresponsible influencers often have huge followings.
Other motivations:
Some people show a more animal-focussed, empathetic form of connection and describe strong bonds with their animals, including those who ‘rescued’ the animal from a previous harmful situation.
For some owners research and providing well above minimum standards of care, enclosure size and enrichment is important. They try to ensure all aspects of the Five Domains are met (see page 24).
Smaller numbers express the desire to keep or breed particular species to aid conservation (by providing captive bred animals of endangered species to avoid them being wild-caught).
Some owners, especially those with larger collections, appear to justify keeping their animals by using them for visits to schools and other groups to provide handling experiences and talk about the animals. This is often their primary business.
LIFE IN CAPTIVITY
The Five Domains of animal welfare
The Five Domains model is a modern and widely accepted method of assessing animal welfare. Each of the first four domains – nutrition, physical environment, health, and behavioural interactions – has associated emotional and mental experiences. These experiences together determine the fifth domain, mental state, and the animal’s overall welfare. Some negative experiences are unavoidable, but the aim should be for an overall balance of positive welfare.
DOMAIN 1: Nutrition
Availability and quality of food and water, and method of feeding.
DOMAIN 2: Physical environment
Conditions in the environment, such as temperature or amount of space, and the opportunities the environment provides.
DOMAIN 3: Health
The presence or absence of disease or injury, and the animal’s overall fitness.
POSITIVE
Nutrition
• Satiety
• Pleasure
Physical environment
• Comfort
• Relaxation/calmness
Health
• Comfort
• Vitality
Behavioural interactions
• Enjoyment
• Playfulness
• Confidence
• Curiosity
• Affection
• Focus
• Excitement
DOMAIN 5: Mental state
DOMAIN 4:
Behavioural interactions
The choices and opportunities an animal has to engage in relevant and desirable behaviours, and their interactions with humans and other animals.
• Many people are irresponsible and impulsive when buying animals.
• Social media posts often show inadequate enclosures, lack of knowledge and compromised welfare. This was also reported by interviewees involved in rescue and the veterinary profession.
• The majority of common health issues vets see in practice are caused by poor diet or husbandry.
• The SAWC evidence review and the BVA have noted that some species are not suitable to be kept as pets.
• There is a lack of readily available, accurate, consistent and up-to-date information.
• Animals kept in inappropriate social groups, without sufficient space or resources, or social species kept in isolation, suffer from chronic stress and other harms.
• There is a shortage of vets who are suitably qualified, experienced and willing to treat wild animals in private keeping.
• Other concerns include sleep disruption, escapes, accidents and predation.
Insufficient or inappropriate environments and husbandry
The wide range of species kept have an equally wide range of specific needs. As these are wild animals, many of those needs are difficult or impossible to meet in a typical domestic environment. Some requirements, such as for specific temperature ranges or UVB light, can be met as long as the keeper has the right knowledge and equipment. Others, such as species’ need to burrow, fly, leap or climb, are much more difficult for the average owner to provide.
Our immersion into online communities suggests that many owners are irresponsible and impulsive when buying animals, and appear to do very little research in advance. In some cases, people do not even know which species they have. Animals are viewed as things to be bought, sold and exchanged, as status symbols or accessories to benefit humans.
There is also widespread evidence of addictive behaviour, which is normalised and encouraged, with significant implications for animal welfare and the risk of tipping into hoarding and neglect.
On social media, most owners appear to consider industry minimum standards to be sufficient, and others do not even manage to meet those. Examples include:
• widespread use of racks and RUBs to contain even quite large reptiles;
• the use of other small and inadequate enclosures;
• lack of suitable UVB light;
• incorrect heat gradients;
• inadequate ventilation;
• tanks lacking suitable aquatic filters;
• impulse purchasing sometimes resulting in accommodation designed for temporary housing becoming permanent.
We also witnessed regular social media posts which indicated that owners lacked the knowledge to appropriately meet the animals’ needs, and/or that the animals’ welfare was compromised. Examples include:
• animals regularly refusing to eat (or ‘going on hunger strike’);
• animals self-mutilating or attacking others kept in the same enclosure (including many lizards dropping their tails due to stress);
• stereotypic behaviours such as glass or cage surfing (even for animals in very large enclosures);
• photos of animals wearing clothes or subjected to the use of photo props;
• owners deliberately leaving their enclosures “uncluttered”, despite recommendations that certain species needed coverage and multiple hiding places to feel safe, to enable them to see their animal whenever they want;
• nocturnal animals being routinely woken during the day for handling, with negative implications for the quality and stability of their sleep cycles.
The BVA 2022 Voice of the Veterinary Profession survey found that 81% of vets were concerned that the welfare needs of [wild animals kept as pets] were not being met. The most cited welfare issues were ‘irresponsible animal ownership’ (82%) and ‘irresponsible breeding or sourcing’ (11%). Vets who treat ‘exotic pets’ reported
that 58% of the animals they see do not have their five animal welfare needs met (as required by law). Of those, 92% said that the ‘need for a suitable environment’ was often not being fulfilled.
Some species may be impossible to adequately provide for in a domestic environment. The evidence review carried out for the SAWC, to inform their recommendations, notes that: “There are fundamental questions about the keeping of birds in captivity. The act of placing a bird in a cage may be sufficient to cause stress, unless the enclosure is so large and well equipped that the bird does not perceive it as captivity. The ideal enclosure may exceed the means of the average private owner. Flight and socialisation are particularly challenging natural behaviours to accommodate in captivity” (Oldham, 2022).
It also noted that the BVA “can think of no circumstances where a primate would benefit from being kept privately as a pet. They are unsuitable to be kept as companion animals.”
Our research suggests that a range of species which are currently kept are not able to have a good life when kept in the average domestic situation. All interviewees involved in frontline rescue or the veterinary profession felt very strongly that some classes/species should not be allowed to be kept as pets because they cannot engage in natural behaviour or their needs cannot be met. Examples given included primates, parrots, larger fish, foxes, and African pygmy hedgehogs.
“ PRIMATES ARE LONG-LIVED, INTELLIGENT, SOCIALLYCOMPLEX ANIMALS AND WE CAN THINK OF NO CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE A PRIMATE WOULD BENEFIT FROM BEING KEPT PRIVATELY AS A PET.
THE BRITISH VETERINARY ASSOCIATION
Social groupings
Social media is full of horror stories of animals attacking (and often killing) each other, or one bullying another resulting in weight loss and ill health. Closer inspection often reveals that the enclosures were too small, resources were insufficient (e.g. only one food and water source for multiple animals), and a lack of knowledge of the behaviour of the species meant inexperienced or uninformed owners did not intervene until too late.
Many social animals are being kept in species-isolation. African grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus), for example, are a highly intelligent, long-lived, social species who, when kept alone, suffer chronic stress and frequently develop stereotypic feather plucking. Other species naturally live in large and/or dynamic social groups, which are impossible to replicate in a domestic environment.
OBJECTIFICATION, COMMODIFICATION AND WELFARE REPERCUSSIONS
Key points
• The strongest theme to emerge from our research was objectification and commodification: that these animals are widely treated as ‘things’ to be used, bought and sold.
• A strong sense that humans have the right to own any animals they choose leads to animals suffering and dying due to human error or lack of knowledge. This is often seen as justifiable if the person learns or grows from that experience.
• Many owners feel a need to own wild animals to help their mental health, but simultaneously find keeping them stressful and may struggle to cope.
• Animals are provoked to respond in ways that people find cute but are often signs of stress, fear or discomfort.
• Some animals, especially reptiles, are regarded as stupid and without emotions, leading to dismissal of their distress and to them being kept in small, barren enclosures.
• These animals have no control over any aspect of their lives, and many are subjected to forced handling.
• Hand rearing of birds can cause psychological issues.
Sense of entitlement
Across the digital ethnography there was a strong sense of entitlement: that humans have a right to keep any animals they choose and that right should not be restricted.
Some people thought the physical experience of handling and/or caring for a wild animal was important to help them and others reconnect with nature. They felt that subjecting individual animals to captivity was a small sacrifice if it ultimately led to increased human appreciation of nature in a time of biodiversity crisis.
While it was acknowledged, both in interviews and on social media, that this could (and often did) result in fatalities due to lack of knowledge and experience, the maxims that “everyone has to start somewhere”, and many “learn the hard way” implied that this collateral damage to individual animals was acceptable if it resulted in people learning and was linked in people’s minds to those other goals.
One welfare
It seems that many owners feel a ‘need’ to keep wild animals to support their mental health or because physical disabilities prevent them from caring for more traditional companion animals, while also frequently struggling to cope with the associated responsibilitiesto the detriment of the animals in their care.
A related issue, which came up frequently, is the stress caused by owning wild animals, mostly in terms of their complex care needs and how frequently things can go wrong. Posts on social media appeared regularly which discussed how stressed owners were because, for example, animals were not eating, not shedding correctly, had injuries, had escaped, were dying, were exhibiting stereotypies, were biting/striking/rejecting being handled, or equipment was not working as it should leading to leaks, fires/burns, or difficulty maintaining correct humidity, temperature, or water quality parameters. The difficulty and cost associated with accessing veterinary care was another significant stressor.
DISPOSAL CHANGING HANDS
Key points
• Many of these animals change hands multiple times throughout their lives. This can mean repeated stress and upheaval, which is particularly harmful to long-lived species. Parrots, who typically suffer in any kind of captivity, may change hands multiple times and experience grief as well as other forms of suffering.
• The most common reason for trying to sell or rehome an animal is a change in circumstance, such as pregnancy, physical or mental health problems, unemployment, or moving house.
• Other reasons for people giving up animals include a loss of interest, inability to meet the animal’s needs, planned or unplanned offspring, inheritance, and pity purchases.
REASONS FOR ONLINE SALES
Of the 465 online listings identified on monitored websites during a two-month period, 129 provided a reason for sale. Only 8 of these adverts provided an animalrelated reason, the remaining 121 provided a human-related reason. In addition, 55 of the 465 listings were assumed to be the result of purposeful breeding for selling based on the content of the advert.
Change in circumstances
The cost of keeping wild animals is becoming impossible for many in the current economic climate. The lack of stability – financial, housing, relationship, family – experienced by many young people also partly explains the high turnover of wild animals being advertised for sale or rehoming. In both social media posts and online advertisements, the most common reason for trying to sell or rehome an animal was a change in circumstance, such as pregnancy, relationship breakdown, physical or mental health problems, unemployment, job insecurity, landlord issues, moving between short term rentals, or travelling.
Inheritance
A significant number of owners had not intended to acquire wild animals but inherited them, either from relatives passing (often the case when long lived animals such as tortoises and parrots are involved), or from friends and family losing interest. In some instances, the new owners found the animals to have been neglected.
Pity purchases
Pet shop employees form a large proportion of owners. While this is partly because they have an interest and easy access to animals, many of them have animals who they ‘rescued’ or purchased out of pity due to concerns about their welfare. Posts suggest that this also happens regularly among other owners, particularly with fish and reptiles from pet shops. Others reframe their purchase as a rescue later, when struggling to care for the animal. Some comments on social media do point out that these purchases are perpetuating unethical breeding and sales.
In other cases, animals were rescued from people who were not adequately providing for them due to poor mental health, lack of knowledge or preparation, and change in circumstances, among other reasons.
Other reasons
Other reasons for people giving up animals include a loss of interest, inability to meet the animal’s needs, planned or unplanned offspring, and the animal not getting along with other animals in the household.
The SAWC (2021) stated that “among non domesticated animals in private keeping [...] anecdotal reports suggest that a disproportionate number of animals die prematurely.” Reports presented to the SAWC seem to suggest that this is particularly the case for fish, reptiles, and wildcaught animals. Multiple sources report that the majority of fish die during transport and trade.
Our digital ethnography revealed many animal deaths in domestic homes due to owner and/or breeder ignorance or neglect. Posts commonly referred to pet deaths as a result of genetic defects or preventable conditions such as metabolic bone disease, blamed on irresponsible breeders and sellers. Premature deaths were also frequently caused by inappropriate housing, incorrect husbandry, inadequate diets, and other forms of human error. This was also noted in interviews by members of the veterinary profession and those involved in rescue.
Home euthanasia
Another significant welfare issue, perhaps linked to the lack of access to veterinary care, is home euthanasia. While social media posts on home euthanasia were not common, they did surface regularly enough to indicate that this is an issue. Methods mentioned included blunt force trauma, cervical dislocation, freezing, and putting a substance, such as clove oil, in the water to kill fish, axolotls and other aquatic species.
Steve is a four-year-old marmoset monkey who ended up in Scottish SPCA care because his owner could not care for him properly. We do not know where the person bought Steve, though it seems likely it was online.
Steve had a very poor diet and was addicted to marshmallows. Scottish SPCA and Edinburgh Zoo staff worked to wean him off the marshmallows and introduce a more appropriate diet. They also found ways to keep his clever mind busy, such as completing wooden puzzles with his carers.
We do not know for sure where his name came from, but the ‘pet’ monkey in the children’s film Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs looked similar, so he may have been named after this character.
Steve has now left the Scottish SPCA’s care and is living in Wildside Exotic Rescue, a sanctuary that gives homes to animals rescued from the ‘exotic pet’ trade.
Mr Pricklepants, named after a character in Toy Story 3, is a three-year-old African pygmy hedgehog. He was bought via an online advert when he was a hoglet. However, the owner’s expectations did not prepare them for the reality of caring for this species.
Mr Pricklepants doesn’t like being handled, and needs to have his feet cleaned regularly as hedgehogs poop while on their exercise wheel and then tread in it, so it gets dried into their feet and can potentially lead to health problems.
This disconnect between human expectation and reality is an all too common story for these hedgehogs, who are widely regarded as ‘easy’ and cute but actually require a lot of effort and usually do not enjoy being handled.
Mr Pricklepants was handed in to a hedgehog rescue charity and has now been adopted by one of the volunteers there. He is living in a large enclosure with lots of enrichment and enjoys running on his exercise wheel at night.
A single list of permitted species (‘permitted list’) of animals that may legally be kept as pets should be compiled and implemented.
• Once the required legislative changes are in place, there will need to be a process for determining which species are included on the list. Only species that can be competently kept by an average person in a home, consistent with a modern understanding of all aspects of animal welfare, should be on the list. Consideration should also be given to the impacts on the conservation of wild populations for species commonly extracted from the wild to supply the pet trade, the health and safety of humans and other animals, and the potential risks to ecosystem health associated with the escape or release of non-native species. The process of compiling a list should be part of an evidencebased framework, and the development of the criteria against which species should be assessed should be carried out in consultation with relevant experts and stakeholders, by an independent committee. The agreed criteria should then be applied by an independent board to formulate a list of permitted species.
• The Scottish Government should draw on the experience of other countries where such lists have already been compiled and apply this experience, where relevant, to Scotland. We are aware of research currently underway that will assess the impact and success of different approaches and make recommendations for the most appropriate methodology.
• There should be a ‘grandfather clause’ to allow animals belonging to non-listed species already in private ownership to be kept until they die (subject to them being afforded acceptable welfare protections), but not be bred or otherwise replaced.
• Consideration should be given to require demonstration of adequate knowledge, resources and facilities before acquiring any animal on the list. Our research found that many animals are being kept in poor welfare, which includes many species likely to be included on a permitted list. Keeping any animal is a responsibility, not a right, and should be dependent on being able to provide for that animal to have a good life.
• We note that the SAWC (2022) recommends that people who can demonstrate competency and suitable facilities should be able to apply to keep species not on the list, under a licensing scheme. This may be necessary, at least in the short term, for rescue centres, in order to accommodate animals that may be relinquished by their owners once new regulations are introduced. Our research has confirmed that a minority of those who keep wild animals privately are dedicated and knowledgeable, and may be better equipped to provide adequate welfare for certain species.
• There should be a total ban on the importation of wild-caught animals, as recommended by the SAWC.
The Scottish Government should form a taskforce of relevant stakeholders, to tackle ease of acquisition, welfare risks, and missing or inaccurate information.
• This body, separate from those responsible for the permitted list, will consider measures complementary to the list that will be necessary to ensure its effectiveness and improve the welfare of listed species.
• Deficiencies in regulation of online sales and pet shops should be addressed.
• Better collaboration, communication, consistency in messaging, access to accurate information, and the removal of harmful misinformation or tropes were all identified as urgently needed by our research.
• ‘Minimum’ standards should be those that meet the animals’ needs under the Five Domains model of animal welfare. Currently, voluntary industry minimum standards are inadequate, and even those are often not met. It is particularly important to better account for social needs, behavioural interactions and mental state, which are too frequently poorly understood.
• The taskforce should also help devise demand reduction and education strategies.
Demand reduction and education strategies should be identified and implemented.
• It will be important to tackle the key factors that drive the demand for wild animals, outlined earlier in this report. Behaviour change theory should be used to determine strategies to reduce, for example, impulsive purchasing and external influences. Additionally, sociological and psychological research could help inform suitable interventions to prevent addictive accumulation.
• There should be a well-resourced and widely disseminated, government-led, public education campaign. This should explain legislative changes, urge careful thought before acquiring any animal, emphasise the sentience of animals – especially those like reptiles, which our research shows are commonly regarded as lacking intelligence, awareness or feelings – and signpost to trustworthy information.
• Animal welfare should be a mandatory element of Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence. Young people were identified in our research as one of the main groups seeking to keep wild animals as pets in their homes.
REFERENCES
AWC (2023). Animal Welfare Committee - Opinion on the space requirements for snakes in vivaria within pet selling establishments. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ media/647dc7c35f7bb700127fa45c/AWC_opinion_ space_snakes_vivaria_pet_selling_establishments. pdf
BVA (2023). British Veterinary Association Policy position on non-traditional companion animals. https://www.bva.co.uk/media/4895/bva-policyposition-on-non-traditional-companion-animalsfinal-january-2023.pdf
McClure (2022). New Zealand pet shelters are being swamped with axolotls. Are Minecraft and TikTok to blame?
Nekaris, K. A. I., Musing, L., Vazquez, A. G., & Donati, G. (2015). Is tickling torture? Assessing welfare towards slow lorises (Nycticebus spp.) within Web 2.0 videos. Folia Primatologica, 86(6), 534-551.
Nijman, V., & Nekaris, K. A. I. (2017). The Harry Potter effect: The rise in trade of owls as pets in Java and Bali, Indonesia. Global ecology and conservation, 11, 84-94.
Oldham, L. S. (2022). Evidence on the welfare of exotic pets in Scotland. https://www.gov.scot/publications/scoping-reviewevidence-welfare-exotic-pets-scotland/
Ramsay, N. F., Ng, P. K. A., O’Riordan, R. M., & Chou, L. M. (2007). The red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta elegans) in Asia: a review. Biological invaders in inland waters: Profiles, distribution, and threats, 161-174.
The SAWC (2021). Scottish Animal Welfare Commission – Interim report on exotic pets in Scotland https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-animalwelfare-commission-interim-report-exotic-petsscotland/pages/1
The SAWC (2022). Scottish Animal Welfare Commission - Exotic Pet Working Group: final report https://www.gov.scot/publications/final-reportexotic-pet-working-group-scottish-animal-welfarecommission/
3. Pet shop visits
An investigator posing as a potential customer visited 13 pet shops across the central belt of Scotland which sell wild animals as pets. They documented the species sold and conditions that the animals were kept in, and spoke with staff to assess the type of advice that was given to prospective owners. During those conversations, our ‘mystery shopper’ said that they knew very little about these wild species but were considering purchasing an animal as a gift for a tenyear-old nephew. This scenario was chosen to elicit any advice that pet shop employees determined was necessary to give in relation to animals being given as a gift and kept by children, in addition to more general advice given to any novice potential owner.
APPENDIX 2: European countries with a permitted (‘positive’) list
Permitted lists that are in place or being developed vary between countries in relation to the taxa they cover, and the criteria that are applied to determine whether species are added to the list.
Positive list already implemented
Belgium
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Cyprus
Norway
Variations on positive list implemented
Italy
Croatia
Malta
Positive list enshrined into law, actively developing lists
