I know you're a snake blog, but I saw you mentioned sugar gliders as being unethical to keep - is that because of their social needs, or is there something else about keeping them in captivity that's unethical? (Just curious - I googled the question but the most immediately relevant result is from an ARA org that opposes keeping animals in captivity ever, for philosophical reasons.)
No worries, I can still help with this question!
The main issues with sugar gliders are that it's nearly impossible to meet their social and dietary needs in a private home. In the wild, they live in large social groups, so unless you plan on getting like fifteen of them, they're not going to get the social structure they need to be healthy and happy. They're nocturnal, so it's difficult for a human keeper to provide that companionship. Their diet is also complex, costly, and notoriously commercial diets marketed for them will often kill them if that's all they get. In the wild, they largely eat eucalyptus gum and nectar. That's difficult to provide.
There are other things - they need large, open enclosures that you just can't buy, they're very fragile and can easily get hurt, and they're messy - but the bottom line is they're just bad pets. They tend to suffer in captivity from isolation, poor diets, and inadequate housing, and that's even without considering how buying one often supports the illegal pet trade.
Definitely animals that belong in the wild and in accredited zoos.
