I really like dogs and would really love to own a dog someday. Is it vegan or buy or adopt a pet and feed it pet-food? What if the pet in question is a service-dog for a disabled person?
Keeping a pet: vegan or non-vegan?
- Thread starter PlantEater
- Start date
There have been many discussions on this forum about this topic.
I would suggest pulling some of those threads up and then see if that is helpful for you.
Emma JC
I would suggest pulling some of those threads up and then see if that is helpful for you.
Emma JC
When you buy, it's bad. When you adopt, it's cool, but only when you treat the dog like an individual, and let the dog's feelings be recognized. That's kind of hard to do since they don't speak any human languages. (Jokes. Ugh).
As long as they are cared for and live in a safe environment i think pets are amazing. I couldn't live without them.I love them.
Dogs can be great family members, and there are certainly plenty available who need homes. They also thrive being vegan and there are lots of commercial vegan dogs foods available. The problem with dogs is that you might be surprised at how expensive they can be - vaccinations, licensing, microchipping, heart worm preventative, flea and tick control, injuries, illnesses (some chronic), and boarding or dog sitting just to name a few. So do your research before hand. As someone who volunteers a lot of time in a shelter, I can tell you that many, many dogs are surrendered because their owners simply cannot afford to keep them healthy and occupied.
Lou
Forum Legend
I think a pet is one of the gray areas for vegans. I could easily construct pro and con arguments for having a pet being vegan.
However, IMHO veganism is all about compassion. And I can't think of a more compassionate thing than to rescue an animal, take it into your home, and to care and feed it for the rest of your life.
Also, there are vegan dog foods many vegans make their own homemade vegan dog food. Considering how crappy most commercial dog foods are feeding a dog homemade food is an improvement.
One of our members, @Vegan Dogs , is an expert on this subject. And even knows all about vegan cats. Look up some of her posts.
However, IMHO veganism is all about compassion. And I can't think of a more compassionate thing than to rescue an animal, take it into your home, and to care and feed it for the rest of your life.
Also, there are vegan dog foods many vegans make their own homemade vegan dog food. Considering how crappy most commercial dog foods are feeding a dog homemade food is an improvement.
One of our members, @Vegan Dogs , is an expert on this subject. And even knows all about vegan cats. Look up some of her posts.
TofuRobot
Forum Legend
And not just expensive in terms of money, but time. It's not cool to leave your dog home alone all day long, they need company just like we do. It's a commitment of at minimum 5-8 years, up to 20 or more maximum. It's one reason why after my own dog passes I have decided no more pets. It's just not fair unless you can give them the time and care the need and deserve.
Vegan Dogs
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2016
- Reaction score
- 196
- Age
- 65
- Lifestyle
- Vegan
The op was honest..pets are primarily about the use....pleasure of entertainment animals as pets give us
I admit that
I got turkeys out of realisation those were not useful pets and readily bred and killed to feed referred pet dogs ones
I feed my pets all vegan dogs cat turkeys there is no life saving otherwise
I admit that
I got turkeys out of realisation those were not useful pets and readily bred and killed to feed referred pet dogs ones
I feed my pets all vegan dogs cat turkeys there is no life saving otherwise
Lou
Forum Legend
Have I ever mentioned how much I appreciate Vox News?
Here is a really good take on it. Are owning pets Ethical?
www.vox.com
The author also recommends a book that might be worth reading. I believe that book is the basis of most of the research of this article
Run, Spot, Run: The Ethics of Keeping Pets by author and bioethicist Jessica Pierce.
Here is a really good take on it. Are owning pets Ethical?
The case against pet ownership
Why we should aim for a world with fewer but happier pets.
www.vox.com
The author also recommends a book that might be worth reading. I believe that book is the basis of most of the research of this article
Run, Spot, Run: The Ethics of Keeping Pets by author and bioethicist Jessica Pierce.
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
The issue for me is whether or not it can fulfill its natural instincts. We force animals to live according to human social requirements and I don't think that is good. However, if you buy a rescue dog, you are at least giving the animal a better chance than it had and not funding the profit driven pet industry.
When I found out what breeders do I was disgusted. Culling is disgusting. They will kill a mother rat for protecting her kids and biting. Then they'll kill the babies too. And they'll say the best breeders cull, and if you don't then you're just a backyard breeder.
I get that culling doesn't always mean kill, but when a rat breeder talks about it it always means kill. They talk about sticking baby rats in the freezer before they're 10 days old. And they'll give this advise to someone who just brought home a pregnant rat and is not a breeder. I personally have taken home a pregnant rat, and took care of all her babies. I loved it. I didn't know she was pregnant.
They have no mercy for the rats because they're trying to make money from them, bitey rats won't sell. Then they would have to take care of them, so instead of that they just kill them off. That breaks my heart. I think when animals are used to make money they will always suffer. Even if they are sold as pets and not food. I think adopting may be the only ethical way. When an animal starts to cost the breeder money and not make them money, they will resort to killing them. They can't afford to take care of all those animals.
I get that culling doesn't always mean kill, but when a rat breeder talks about it it always means kill. They talk about sticking baby rats in the freezer before they're 10 days old. And they'll give this advise to someone who just brought home a pregnant rat and is not a breeder. I personally have taken home a pregnant rat, and took care of all her babies. I loved it. I didn't know she was pregnant.
They have no mercy for the rats because they're trying to make money from them, bitey rats won't sell. Then they would have to take care of them, so instead of that they just kill them off. That breaks my heart. I think when animals are used to make money they will always suffer. Even if they are sold as pets and not food. I think adopting may be the only ethical way. When an animal starts to cost the breeder money and not make them money, they will resort to killing them. They can't afford to take care of all those animals.
Last edited:
I have never liked the idea of having pets. Humans should leave enough of the world undeveloped so animals have plenty of space to live naturally. But I also know that won't happen. We're slowly occupying more and more land that used to belong exclusively to animals.
Regardless of my anti-pet feelings, I do live with a bird because my wife loves having pets. We bought him from a rescue, we don't clip his wings, and his cage door is tied open. He can come and go as he pleases and fly around a decent-sized room. We have perches situated throughout the room so he can hang out wherever he wants. I find that arrangement acceptable, at least, especially since he wasn't wild born and was sitting in a crowded rescue full of much larger birds. It was obvious that his previous human room mates clipped his wings, because, once his wing feathers grew out fully, he didn't seem to know what to do with them. Over the course of a few months, we watched him teach himself how to fly. Now he swoops around the room like a pro. He would be happier with even more space, but we figure that we're giving him the best life that we possibly can. At least he doesn't sit in a cage all day with his wings clipped. I could never treat a bird like that. So, I'm at least "okay enough" given the situation, but I still don't really like the entire concept of pets.
I have never really considered pets in the context of veganism, but I agree that as long as one can give the animal a decent life and not treat the pet as a toy, I think it can work. But I'd rather see animals in the wild.
Regardless of my anti-pet feelings, I do live with a bird because my wife loves having pets. We bought him from a rescue, we don't clip his wings, and his cage door is tied open. He can come and go as he pleases and fly around a decent-sized room. We have perches situated throughout the room so he can hang out wherever he wants. I find that arrangement acceptable, at least, especially since he wasn't wild born and was sitting in a crowded rescue full of much larger birds. It was obvious that his previous human room mates clipped his wings, because, once his wing feathers grew out fully, he didn't seem to know what to do with them. Over the course of a few months, we watched him teach himself how to fly. Now he swoops around the room like a pro. He would be happier with even more space, but we figure that we're giving him the best life that we possibly can. At least he doesn't sit in a cage all day with his wings clipped. I could never treat a bird like that. So, I'm at least "okay enough" given the situation, but I still don't really like the entire concept of pets.
I have never really considered pets in the context of veganism, but I agree that as long as one can give the animal a decent life and not treat the pet as a toy, I think it can work. But I'd rather see animals in the wild.
Last edited:
@Danielle I wish I could give your post about pet rats just above more than one positive rating!
To the original poster: I have mixed feelings about pets. I think that it's possible to give an animal a life in captivity as good as, or even better than, the life they would have had in the wild. BUT.... I myself would not now buy any animal from a breeder (although back in the 1960s I had an aquarium). If I'm going to take on such a responsibility, I want the animal to benefit from it- which means I only want to take in someone who already needs a home, NOT pay a breeder to give me that responsibility.
In my experience, cats, rabbits, small animals such as gerbils, hamsters, and mice, and fishes (both tropical and goldfish) need FAR MORE CARE than people realize. For example, back in 2006, I took in 5 of the goldfish who turned up in a co-worker's Koi pond. I didn't take them all because I knew that fully-grown goldfishes need at least 10 gallons PER FISH to be at all healthy. And sure enough, they eventually graduated from the 10-gallon tank I had from my aquarium days to a 20-gallon tank someone was discarding to 50-gallon tank I bought from a neighbor whose turtle outgrew it! I eventually found them homes. But I think 6 of those 50-gallon setups would have made my floors sag. (and made my house moldy from the excessive humidity, too...)
Another example: Rabbits can make excellent, responsive, affectionate pets- but they need to be watched when they're roaming in the house because of their tendency to gnaw, and they'll be unhappy (as well as unhealthy) cooped up in a cage. No doubt this is the reason so many rabbits turn up in shelters a short time after Easter.
And then there are dogs and birds...
I've never had primary responsibility for a dog, but have lived with them. I've also known people with pet birds such as parrots, conures, cockatiels, etc. From what I've heard and observed, these animals need even more care than the ones I've mentioned above. But they are often even more responsive to their humans than my animals have been with me, although they and I definitely loved each other (well, maybe not the fishes).
So I don't think it's always bad for animals to be pets. But too often, it is.
To the original poster: I have mixed feelings about pets. I think that it's possible to give an animal a life in captivity as good as, or even better than, the life they would have had in the wild. BUT.... I myself would not now buy any animal from a breeder (although back in the 1960s I had an aquarium). If I'm going to take on such a responsibility, I want the animal to benefit from it- which means I only want to take in someone who already needs a home, NOT pay a breeder to give me that responsibility.
In my experience, cats, rabbits, small animals such as gerbils, hamsters, and mice, and fishes (both tropical and goldfish) need FAR MORE CARE than people realize. For example, back in 2006, I took in 5 of the goldfish who turned up in a co-worker's Koi pond. I didn't take them all because I knew that fully-grown goldfishes need at least 10 gallons PER FISH to be at all healthy. And sure enough, they eventually graduated from the 10-gallon tank I had from my aquarium days to a 20-gallon tank someone was discarding to 50-gallon tank I bought from a neighbor whose turtle outgrew it! I eventually found them homes. But I think 6 of those 50-gallon setups would have made my floors sag. (and made my house moldy from the excessive humidity, too...)
Another example: Rabbits can make excellent, responsive, affectionate pets- but they need to be watched when they're roaming in the house because of their tendency to gnaw, and they'll be unhappy (as well as unhealthy) cooped up in a cage. No doubt this is the reason so many rabbits turn up in shelters a short time after Easter.
And then there are dogs and birds...
I've never had primary responsibility for a dog, but have lived with them. I've also known people with pet birds such as parrots, conures, cockatiels, etc. From what I've heard and observed, these animals need even more care than the ones I've mentioned above. But they are often even more responsive to their humans than my animals have been with me, although they and I definitely loved each other (well, maybe not the fishes).
So I don't think it's always bad for animals to be pets. But too often, it is.
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
According to your personal opinion about what is better without checking what the animal would want.
But so often they can't have the life they'd want. The shelters are full of animals whose best hope is a home.
Dogs and cats are already domestic. Feral cats have pretty miserable lives (at least anywhere I've lived). They aren't adaptive to the parasites and diseases other animals live with
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
I agree with you but Tom's point didn't seem to me to be about already domesticated animals in shelters. On re-reading his post, maybe that is what he meant, but it sounded to me like he was partly excusing general exploitation on the grounds that we know better what is good for the animal than the animal does.
@Tom L. my apologies if I misunderstood you.
Maybe not a big topic, but other than of course always rescuing someone from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder, I think it is important to think of an animal companion that you share your home with, and not a “pet” that you own.
No, that's okay. I was referring primarily to domesticated animals in shelters- but I was not excluding wild animals. IF- I repeat and stress, IF... someone truly knows what a given animal needs to be truly happy and content in captivity, and provides the animal with that, I can't say that such a life would not be better than a natural life in their native/natural habitat with all the attendant hazards of natural predators, diseases, possible lack of food/water, drought / harsh winters, etc.
I'm assuming that the captive life I describe is what the animal would want... unless you're trying to include concepts such as "freedom"- which logically brings up arguments about whether the animal would prefer a dangerous and possibly short free life to a safer, longer, more pleasant life in captivity. I don't currently think animals have an intellectual conception of such things. This may not give humans the right to make such decisions for them- but they already do, when they make a decision to spay/neuter or euthanize an animal in their care.
majorbloodnok
Forum Senior
It would obviously not be correct for me to have a view on what's Vegan or not, but I hope I can have an opinion about what I think is and isn't appropriate.
To my mind, we're all a part of the world and there's nothing unnatural about having an interaction with an animal. The language we use is totally irrelevant to the animal (it doesn't care if we use the word "pet", "companion", "customer" or "victim") but it does matter what the person's attitude and intentions are.
I have two cats who have almost completely unrestricted access to the outside world (apart from when we need to catch them to take them to the vet). They keep coming back, so I think that can reasonably be taken as a sign they're happy with the arrangement. We got them for two reasons; one self-centred, one altruistic. The cats needed a home, so we provided one (the altruistic bit). We live in the country and need to keep the local rodent population out of the house (the selfish bit). The result is a form of mutual exploitation. I see nothing wrong with that as long as we continue to treat the cats humanely (not, for instance, going away for a couple of days without ensuring someone's able to visit and check their food, water and so on). Is it Vegan? No idea. Am I comfortable with the ethics? Yes.
That leads on, therefore, to motives for having pets. If both sides benefit and are comfortable in that existence, that's great but does someone REALLY gain companionship from a snake as a pet or is that just a form of wanting to own something unusual? N.B. I'm not saying all snake owners are selfish, but I doubt every single one has been rigorous in examining their motives.
Eventually, whilst animals can't talk it's fairly well accepted their wants and needs are fairly understandable. They want food, shelter, a sense of safety and the reasonable freedom to exercise their instincts and natural behaviour. To illustrate with extreme examples, stick a cheetah in a 10 yard by 10 yard enclosure and it impinges on those instincts so it won't be "happy". However, enclose a portion of the Serengeti and the cheetah may be captive but it'll still be as happy as before. If we decide to bring animals into our lives - whether we call them pets or not - and honestly ensure their key needs are met, I don't see that as wrong.
To my mind, we're all a part of the world and there's nothing unnatural about having an interaction with an animal. The language we use is totally irrelevant to the animal (it doesn't care if we use the word "pet", "companion", "customer" or "victim") but it does matter what the person's attitude and intentions are.
I have two cats who have almost completely unrestricted access to the outside world (apart from when we need to catch them to take them to the vet). They keep coming back, so I think that can reasonably be taken as a sign they're happy with the arrangement. We got them for two reasons; one self-centred, one altruistic. The cats needed a home, so we provided one (the altruistic bit). We live in the country and need to keep the local rodent population out of the house (the selfish bit). The result is a form of mutual exploitation. I see nothing wrong with that as long as we continue to treat the cats humanely (not, for instance, going away for a couple of days without ensuring someone's able to visit and check their food, water and so on). Is it Vegan? No idea. Am I comfortable with the ethics? Yes.
That leads on, therefore, to motives for having pets. If both sides benefit and are comfortable in that existence, that's great but does someone REALLY gain companionship from a snake as a pet or is that just a form of wanting to own something unusual? N.B. I'm not saying all snake owners are selfish, but I doubt every single one has been rigorous in examining their motives.
Eventually, whilst animals can't talk it's fairly well accepted their wants and needs are fairly understandable. They want food, shelter, a sense of safety and the reasonable freedom to exercise their instincts and natural behaviour. To illustrate with extreme examples, stick a cheetah in a 10 yard by 10 yard enclosure and it impinges on those instincts so it won't be "happy". However, enclose a portion of the Serengeti and the cheetah may be captive but it'll still be as happy as before. If we decide to bring animals into our lives - whether we call them pets or not - and honestly ensure their key needs are met, I don't see that as wrong.
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
My main concern in the case of genuinely caring people owning animals is whether or not those animals get suitable companionship with their own kind.
