First, please remember that closing a question is an opportunity, not a judgment. Just because the other question was about livestock doesn't mean the answers didn't apply to your question.
In other words, it's an opportunity for you to review the other question and use that knowledge to improve your own. Frankly, your response suggests you reviewed it with as little depth and consideration that you believe the close voters did to you. However, the answer from Marshall Tigerus applies to your question.
What should you have done?
You had an opportunity to improve and clarify your question and explain why those answers were insufficient.
Why is this important?
It improves the quality of the site as a whole by reducing clutter in the SE universe. Stack Exchange is NOT a place where individuals come to receive individual answers. It is a community where people join together to create an encyclopedic reference that many other people can also use and enjoy.
You were not the only person the close voters were thinking about. From the SE perspective, we WANT to point similar questions to previously asked questions that have suitable answers. Not only does it remove the clutter of many similar answers, but it gives future users the chance to see their question from multiple points of view, which is highly beneficial.
However...
While Marshall's answer is (IMO) a perfectly sensible answer to your question (it's as valid for small animals as it is large), you were specific with your question. It's likely too broad (dogs and cats, for example, have different survival traits compared to lizards and snakes, which are more outdoor-habitat-dependent), but I'll vote to reopen it.
However, I'm also going to downvote it for lack of research. It appears some of your answer could have been found simply by reading wikipedia's entry for "feral". The research would have (IMO) resulted in a narrower question or series of questions that would have resulted in higher quality answers.
