However, my purpose in writing this article is not to discuss the legality of having a pet squirrel; but to discuss the morality of it. Whether or not it's legal in any given state, is it morally wrong to keep a squirrel as a pet? I don't believe it is. But I will put some stipulations on that statement.
Just like it is morally wrong to neglect, poorly care for or outright mistreat a pet dog, cat, hamster or any other "legal" pet, so it is morally wrong to neglect, poorly care for or mistreat a pet squirrel.
Another important factor in this issue is how the pet squirrel was obtained. As I have stated before in this newsletter, I would never advocate anybody grabbing an adult squirrel out of their yard, bringing it in the house and trying to make a pet out of it. IT JUST WON'T WORK! The squirrel will have been torn out of the only world it knows and forced to live in a new, totally foreign environment. For this reason, it will never be happy.
Also, I would strongly frown upon anyone deliberately taking a baby squirrel away from its mother to make a pet out of it. I feel this WOULD BE morally wrong.
But what about the person (licensed rehabilitator or not) who takes in an orphaned, sick and/or injured baby squirrel that desperately needs help and saves its life; and then falls in love with it and keeps it as a pet? If this squirrel (who has never gotten to know the wild and only knows indoor life) is happy in its home and its owner feeds and cares for it properly, so as to raise a healthy, happy pet, is this so horrible?
Many, if not most, of the injured or orphaned squirrels taken in (whether by licensed rehabbers or other people) can and maybe should be released when they are ready. But there are some squirrels that are never ready. These are squirrels that, because of either physical problems or inappropriate attitudes, could never survive on their own in the wild.
A good example of a squirrel with an inappropriate attitude is one a rehabber I know raised. It had been orphaned at a very early age when its mother was killed by a car. The rehabber raised it in a cage in an animal hospital. Every time she let it out to get some exercise it would head for the first cat it saw, trying to make friends. It had the misguided impression that every living thing wanted to be its friend and playmate.
Although this rehabber had raised hundreds of squirrels and taught them to fear predators, she couldn't get it through this one's head. It was just an extremely friendly squirrel and nothing was going to change it because that was its nature. The choice for this squirrel was to spend the rest of its life as a pet being cared for by humans or be released to become dinner for the first predator it ran up to and tried to befriend.
We have a lot of rehabbers in our club. Many of them agree with me that there is nothing wrong with keeping a squirrel as a pet that, for whatever reason, could never survive on its own in the wild, as long as it is properly cared for. However, some of them believe that a squirrel should never be kept as a pet no matter what.
Although I disagree with them, I do believe that
most of them have their heart in the right place. One of them is Becky
Cardinal, whose letter on this subject appears in "The Chatter Box" of
issue #14 of this newsletter. She and I have talked about this subject
and she believes that there is no such thing as a squirrel that can't be
rehabbed to survive in the wild. Although she and I believe differently
on this subject, we have "agreed to disagree" and each of us respects the
other's viewpoint. I really do
believe that Becky, and most of the others like
her, really do have the squirrels' best interests in mind.
However, I did have an experience a few months ago that has bothered me a lot and is the real reason behind me doing this article.
As a result of an article titled "If You Really
Love Them" (In A Nutshell #15) submitted by an anonymous club member and
pet squirrel owner in response to Becky's letter and explaining the opposite
view, I received a call from a rehabber who will remain nameless. She is
not a member of this club, but had gotten hold of a copy of the newsletter
and was complaining about the viewpoint
expressed in the above named article.
She felt that a squirrel should never be a pet under any circumstances because "they shouldn't be deprived of the right to be wild."
I asked her, "What about the occasional squirrel that, because it's too friendly and would be a sitting duck for predators or, for some other reason, would never survive in the wild if released?" She told me that, in that case, the squirrel should be euthanized.
I couldn't believe my ears! "Are you saying," I responded, "that in order to keep them from being deprived of the right to be wild, you would, instead, deprive them of the right to live? Isn't that playing God? And is that really the mission of a rehabber? After all, if we applied the same line of thinking to people, we would euthanize all crippled people, blind people, deaf people, etc. so they wouldn't be deprived of the right to walk, see, hear, etc. Also, what makes being too friendly a crime deserving of the death sentence?"
As a result of my response, she softened a little on the euthanizing idea and told me that she would put squirrels that couldn't make it in the wild in cages for educational purposes for children, etc.
This is pretty much where our conversation ended.
However, her last solution to squirrels that can't survive on their own
left me with more questions. If making a pet out of a squirrel and giving
it the run of a whole house is bad because it "deprives it of the right
to be wild," how is confining it to a cage, which is much smaller than
a house, a better alternative? Also, animals in cages for educational purposes
don't get the loving that pets usually get. Is this really looking out
for the squirrel's best
interest?
Maybe I'm missing something here (or maybe I'm just plain stupid) but, her solutions for squirrels that can't make it in the wild don't make any sense to me; especially coming from someone who supposedly loves and wants to help squirrels.
It seems to me that she is so hung up on her belief that squirrels should never be pets under any circumstances that she is willing to accept alternatives that are much worse for the squirrels, rather than give in to the idea of someone keeping and protecting one as a pet.
In my opinion, this borders on fanaticism and is an example of someone, who may have been well meaning at first, crossing the line between helping squirrels and playing God.
Gregg Bassett
Editor and President
©1996-2008 Copyright Squirrelly Productions.™ All Rights Reserved.