Generally speaking, people want to keep a wild animal as a pet for one of many reasons: they want to impress other people by owning an unusual, uncommon animal as a pet. In no case is the happiness of the animal at the heart of the matter.

  If you do want to own a wild animal, for instance a fox ( usually a little larger than your average house cat), you have to take this test first: go to your nearest Humane Society Shelter and bring home a grown cat and a very active dog. Raise them and be with them; consider them your best friends. Do not leave them alone for more than 9 hours in any given day; do not hit them or shout at them; and do not abuse them in any way. If, after two years, both animal are alive and are still with you without your caging them or locking them in a part of your home most of the day, then maybe you have what it takes to own a wild animal.

 If the test sounds stupid or unworkable, or if you just can’t bring yourself to stand such unlovable animals for two years, then you are not suited to owning a fox.

The problem here is in the definition of the word pet. A pet is something you keep in your house or around your yard as a companion---- a companion who is usually prevented from escaping one way or another. Some animals---- dogs and cats, will voluntarily stay with a human even if given the chance to get away. In this sense, dogs and cats are true pets. Please don’t make the life of some wild animals a living hell by trying to raise one as a pet.

Which reason is true for people keeping a wild animal as a pet in the passage?