Humanity has always had a particular relationship with what is considered "exotic"; from the period when Anglo-Saxons operated zoos for dark-skinned individuals to the period of the 1800s, when elephants were highly desired as pets, kept for pleasure, there has been the controversial topic of whether the action of obtaining such "objects" ” is immoral or right, for both the owner and the victim. While the act of owning an exotic animal is tempting, there are multiple negative factors that are introduced when the population is able to own these exotic creatures; From neglect to dangers of extinction, the negative consequences of owning exotic animals dictate that there should be a ban on private ownership of exotic species, as they are, in fact, not pets. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Because of the easy access to obtaining such exotic creatures, there is a cycle of abuse that the animal must endure when the owner discovers that they do not have the ability or resources to care for them. The first step, "Ban Exotic Pet Ownership", introduces the fact that big cats, such as Bengal tigers, are "relatively inexpensive to obtain", which is then expanded on in the second step, "License for Cats" , which states that these exotic animals from foreign lands are sold for the same price as “thoroughbred dogs.” Because of this easy availability, “man's innate fallibility” leads to an inability to take responsibility for a wild animal, which is supported in the second passage as the reader is told that often, sometimes, these animals “end up with people not fully prepared for the responsibility that this type of pet entails. Although these new owners do not want it, they often "become, in effect, abusers", due to their inability to "dedicate the time and resources necessary to care for the animal" or their inability to have a living space standard. , leading to “decreased quality of life [of the animal]”. Often, because of this knowledge, the owner attempts to sell his or her cat, "getting rid of his [exotic pet]", but these zoos typically don't want or need more tigers because they already have their quota for tigers. exotic animals. full cat. Those in favor of private ownership of exotic animals may argue that in some areas “exotic cats may thrive” and that “some wealthy individuals dedicate large tracts of land” to the resources derived from owning such exotic animals; however, the fact that these individuals are an exception because only "some owners are able to do so and because "it is possible" for big cats to thrive, illustrates the fact that most of these exotic pets end up in a home of negligence, therefore highlighting the fact that there should not be a license for the possession of exotic animals by individuals Many times, these exotic creatures are close to possible extinction as there are more individuals purchasing and abusing these. species compared to animals living in their natural habitat. For example, the homeland of the Bengal tiger, India, contains only “2,000 Bengals, or 5% of what it claimed a hundred years ago,” while in the United States, except for zoos, there are approximately “12,000 privately owned Bengals.” This stark numerical contrast represents the low population of Bengals in their natural habitat due to “habitat loss,.