Federal and State Exotic Reptile, Amphibian And Mammal Banning

[wildak]

I think this is in the right place ...(I did'nt notice a section here on laws or in the news where we could stay up to date on who's trying to ban what). It's a BIG rant.

I would like to hear opinions on all the Animal banning going on through out the US.

CT just banned a lot of reptiles, Amphibians, and insects. Some of which are from uneducated people I suppose. From what I understand in that state anyways you have to turn in your animals that are on the list and I'm guessing they will be put down.

The constrictor law just passed so none of the 9 constrictors can cross state lines in anyway. Totaly screwing up many businesses in a time where the economy is already hurting.

There's talks of outlawing large breed dogs that are CAN BE considered dangerous by stopping licensed purebred breeders (not just puppy mills ) from breeding. which labs and golden retrievers and a LOT of other dogs account for a lot of injuries not just pitbulls.

Outlawing any cats that have any exotic genes.

If you look at the Humaine Societies web page turtles and tortoises are going to be in their cross hairs soon. They talk about how many people die from Salmonella every year from turtles and tortoises (which we know is'nt true). They talk about the 4'' law and salmonella. Which is only because a 4'' or less turtle will fit in their childs mouth.. hense the sickness. Who's fault is that?

We need to stop all the animal extremists now or we will all loose the things we hold dear and everyone who's breeding for conservation will have to sit back and watch their favorite animals become extinct since they can't be bred in captivity any longer.

I say lets be just as extreme and elect Ted Nugent for president. If you want someone to fight against animal exstremists he's the man.

Bryan

 

[Yvonne G]

We won't be able to have our tortoises, yet people in China and Asian countries will still have extremely rare and protected tortoises.

 

[Madkins007]

I know this is an unpopular stance in forums like this, but I am all in favor of limiting which animals can be considered as household pets. I say this knowing full well that the more the government gets involved with the laws, the more screwed up they will probably be.

I know people talk about the 'slippery slope' a lot- "if they ban THIS now, then they will ban EVERYTHING eventually', but we see in real life that this does not often happen.

People often point to the rhetoric of the Humane Society of the United States as an example of what the country may do, but honestly- no one really seems to listen to them. Look at how many circuses and horse buggies there are in the US- two of their pet causes (great pun, huh?)

I am 'extreme' enough in my opinion that I believe it should apply to fish and invertebrates as well. I am still wavering on my stance about dogs- but let's face it, dogs are a real danger in the US- domestic or feral!

I will certainly reconsider my stance if you can give me one good reason why anyone should be allowed to have an exotic animal pet that can pose a risk to an innocent bystander if it gets loose- this would include wolves, big cats, venomous and big snakes, and so on. (Remember- owning pets is not specifically named as a right American's have, and 'life, liberty and pursuit of happiness' is not a law.)

Having said all that, what I would LOVE to see would be a tiered system.
- Tier One- animals with no restrictions. Most common pet shop birds, fish, small animals, and many small reptiles would fall in this category.
- Tier Two- animals with few restrictions, but requiring a license, and generally some sort of proof of good husbandry practices (like routine shots, etc.) Dogs and cats are the best examples of this, but I could see it expanded to a few other species.
- Tier Three- restricted animals. If you want an animal on this list (big reptiles, venomous fish and invertebrates, small exotics with little risk and not endangered, etc.) then you need to apply for a permit which would require some proof of capabilities, insurance/bonds, etc. I think I would add some breeds or types of dogs here as well.
- Tier Four- forbidden or VERY restricted animals- dangerous, endangered, big, etc. Basically you need to be able to convince the panel that you can do this and have all precautions in order. This is mostly for zoos and so on, but would be available to anyone who can jump all the hoops.

Most places in the US already have a form of this- with tiers 1, 2, and 4- so we would just need to create a process for tier 3 and shuffle some animals around a bit.

 

[wildak]

I too am in favor of some restrictions like you said a tiered system would be better than a straight out ban.

I am not a fan of animals being sold to anyone in a pet stores. All the Red Ear sliders and other animals that just die or get dumped in a pond a year later.

It should not limit it to zoo only. A lot of people strongly believe in captive breeding programs and should be able to get said permits and work with zoo's and other like institutions. Like Stud book programs where I could exchange bloodlines with these places for the species. Like some of us are doing now.
People could be USDA approved and permitted with random checks and insurance just like zoos. Right now it's heading toward if you are not an educational institution your out.

In CT some of the species banned were without merit. Poison dart frogs and Taranchulas ( I'm not a spider person what so ever, I would sooner put a rattlers head in my mouth than touch a tiny spider) but most of them are harmless with a bee sting type of bite and can't live in the wilds of CT. Poison dart frogs captive born or wild caught are no longer poisonous since they get their poison from the varied insects they eat in the wild. These are just two examples of not properly looking at the facts.

I could see it working better on a state by state basis rather than total ban. Poison dart frog may be able to live in the wilds of South Florida ( I don't really know) and non-native Taranchulas may be able to live in southern states. Why ban them in Northern states if they pose no threat of living in the wild or hurting someone.

I personaly am a reptile lover of all kinds but never had an urge to keep the huge pythons. I could some restrictions for safety and even more where they can survive in the wild. Perhaps requiring microchips in all species that can go feral with huge fines if ones found. Random checks to see if everyone licensed has their chips and records in place. Each state or county would have to hire more officers to do these things but that what the licenses help pay for.

Why don't they ban horses? People are killed by horses every day. We don't know for sure if they are native to the US or not. I know honey bees are not native and they kills way more people than pet crocodiles, or snakes do. I just wonder what's the deal.

There's large amount of tax dollars come from reptiles, horses and honey. Who's picking on reptiles and why not others.

Alaska probably has the strictest animal laws out there but I can keep any non venomous reptile. Crocodile or a Komodo Dragon, you still have to have all the legal paper work. Alaska has strict laws on aquarium fish as well which I strongly believe in since they would be impossible to regulate what gets dumped in a salmon stream.

Once the ball gets rolling it will be hard to stop. Like I said I don't keep giant pythons or tigers but we need to see something other than total ban across the board or turtles and tortoises are going to be on the list.

Ted Nugent for President.

Bryan

 

[Tom]

One good reason: Because I want to.


Bryan. Ted would not be pleased with post number four. Post number three would be dismissed as anti-American BS.

 

[wildak]

Tom I looked it over again and I don't follow what you mean. Can you be more specific?
The stuff about the horses ?

---

Does Ted still have a giant python ? HAHA I forgot about that. oops Sorry TED.
I still like them I just don't want one.

---

Could you imagine the look on the faces of some of the extremist groups if Ted ran for President.
He's a very intelligent man, If Arnold can win in CA Ted can go all the way. He bleeds red white and blue.
Plus his guitar would sound great in the whitehouse.

 

[froghaven5]

Just recently Muscovy ducks were to be banned by the FWS (Migratory Bird division) due to them only being considered native in 3 counties in Texas. Local goverments were complaining about them becoming invasive and the ownership of these ducks were to be banned except for meat purposes only. This regulation was almost passed until many people in the poultry world contacted the appropriate people and educated them on just how private ownership of these ducks have been for many years and continue to be used (meat, eggs and showmanship). The regulation had been halted in 2010 and was in the process of being rewritten.

 

[dmmj]

Please let me make a point about banning. Take calfornia, (please) once you start with one little ban it steamrolls. so first they banned smoking in bars and resturants, hey that worked so lets ban them in governmental buildings, now lets ban them in front of all buildings, now let's do beaches, now let do people's private cars if you have children in there, now they are pushing in one city to ban them in all apartment complexes. the government once they start banning stuff they don't stop. I am gonna disagree with mark and say I only see the same thing happening to reptiles, once they start they won't stop, case in point california.

 

[wildak]

Froghaven: is your avitar a picture of a Redfoot eating a bunny ??? lol


They are already doing it with reptiles. They started with 4 snakes in Florida.........it passed, then only a few months later they amend the bill to add more snakes and make it nation wide, Any transport across state lines is a federal offence.

Then CT banning a ton of animals. Even rear fanged snakes like cat eye, and I think hognose since they have a tiny bit of venom. If you had 1,000 of these mildy venomous snakes in a state and having someone bit that has a allergic reaction and dies. Well that would be like winning the lotto 10 times. Most bites may itch for a few hours.

Then Ohio started by a mad man who let a bunch of dangerous animals loose before he offed himself. Well their should have been some permits and inspections involved. I guess he was cited a few times and when they were about to come get the animals is when he did it. Well that's not our fault. So the extremists got the ammo they needed for that one and build off that 1 instance to try to ban all exotics.

We still have'nt banned smoking, drinking, msg, saturated fats and a million other things that kill people . It's the thought of being killed by a reptile that scare people, destroy what you don't understand.

I'll try to cut and past some new laws.

 

[froghaven5]

Froghaven: is your avitar a picture of a Redfoot eating a bunny ??? lol

Sulcata eating Rose of Sharon flower

---

Froghaven: is your avitar a picture of a Redfoot eating a bunny ??? lol

Sulcata eating Rose of Sharon flower

We have lots of bans here in NJ including smoking most places including in parks (outdoors). Hubby likes to call this a communist state.

 

[dmmj]

A fascist state makes more sense.

 

[wildak]

http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/regulations/26/26-55-6.pdf

Read this from Connecticut, it's long but at least try to skim over it. It is the longest ban list, it basicly listed every thing in the animal kingdom except dogs and some cats.

Somethings are like ok, i can see not wanting your neighbor having an African Elephant as they are hard to contain ( I know from experience) and control.
But all rodents are banned except Guinea pig. this includes hamsters, mice, rats, gerbils, mouse and chinchilla. ??????? (Sorry Little Jonny we need to take your hamster and have it gased.)

Also I seen things like deer and elk and so on, which are often farmed all over the US.

So basicly putting a lot of animal vets, reptile breeders, elk/deer farms, pet stores, feed stores, hay and grain farms and so on out of work. I know it won't shut everyone down but it WILL hurt big time.

I would like to compare their census in 10 years from this past one. Along with unemployment and state taxes.

---

Pulled from Fauna. Hope this is ok.

CT Rule Change/ Reptile Ban

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The situation in CT is a difficult one. There was an administrative rule change done, as opposed to a law passed that had to be voted on and signed by the Governor. This is the danger inherent in states that grant arbitrary rule making authority to their state agencies. A bill proposal you can fight, but often times your ability to influence a rule is minimal by design. They really don't want public input. That is why they granted arbitrary rule making authority.

Last March, when the public comment period was open, USARK made public comment opposing the rule, and urged CT residents to do the same. Obviously they have decided to enact the rule. There appears on the surface to be some legal challenges for the rule. They may have overstepped their legal bounds. USARK attorneys are reviewing the rule to see if we can make a case against it. Stay tuned...

USARK Alert of Public Comment Deadline from last March:

DEADLINE for Public Comment March 1, 2011

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Natural Resources Wildlife Division is taking Public Comment on a proposal to promulgate regulations pursuant to Connecticut General Statute Section 26-55. This proposal as written would effectively ban the importation, ownership and trade of many reptiles. Please make Public Comment through the link provided below!

Click here to make Public Comment: http://usark.org/campaign.php?id=22

Although well meaning, this Rule Making process seems to have been highjacked by the Animal Rights Industry. As stakeholders, USARK members in CT were never invited to participate in the formulation of a proposed rule. The premise of public health and safety is inconsistent with the fact that reptiles have never been a public health or safety risk in Connecticut. The reptiles listed cannot survive outdoors for most of the year in CT. It is too cold even for most reptiles native to the US to survive in CT, let alone tropical reptiles. There has never been a death associated with a captive reptile in CT. On average there is only about one per year in the entire US. Traditional pets and livestock are responsible for dozens of deaths every year without proposed bans of ownership. This proposal has been corrupted by special interest groups opposed to animal ownership and is being exploited to attempt to remove as many animals from ownership as possible. This proposal if enacted will create a new class of criminal in CT from thousands of solid, reptile keeping, law abiding citizens.

USARK has an alternative to a ban on ownership and trade of reptiles. We have a set of industry Best Management Practices that will address concerns in CT, without alienating the citizens of CT or destroying hundreds of jobs in the process. This model provides a voluntary framework for responsible reptile keeping with the primary focus being secure containment and public health & safety protocols.

Click here to read proposed regulation: http://www.usark.org/uploads/Connecticut265562011.pdf

Please engage in the process and make Public Comment prior to the March 1st DEADLINE!

 

[wellington]

Please let me make a point about banning. Take calfornia, (please) once you start with one little ban it steamrolls. so first they banned smoking in bars and resturants, hey that worked so lets ban them in governmental buildings, now lets ban them in front of all buildings, now let's do beaches, now let do people's private cars if you have children in there, now they are pushing in one city to ban them in all apartment complexes. the government once they start banning stuff they don't stop. I am gonna disagree with mark and say I only see the same thing happening to reptiles, once they start they won't stop, case in point california.

My point exactly. Also, if the government would start putting extreme punishments on the animal owners that do not take cate of their animals properly, puppy mills, Pit Bull fighters, **** fighters, animal abusers etc. We could eliminate a lot of the problems. I do believe in breeders having to purchase a hefty yearly license of no less then $500.00, mostly dog breeders. That would eliminate your backyard breeders who for the most part do not have a clue what they are doing or breeding. Also would eliminate many homeless dogs. The next thing the government needs to do. Put the responsibility of babies/kids back into the parents hands and not the rest of us. I shouldn't lose my right, because your to lazy to wash your child's hands. Also as far as I am concerned salmonella, is so blown out as a blame for everything. I should have never lived past the age of childhood or be alive today if salmonella was so bad. The stuff getting kids, etc are all the anti bacterial, keep your homes and body as germ free as possible. That will hurt you the most. This country needs to take more concern about the real issues, poverty, bullying, drugs, etc.,etc.,etc., and keep their nose out of what they know nothing about. People ruin animals, dogs. Their are very few that are born bad. The ones that are, are due to poor breeding, backyard breeders and puppy mills. Sorry for rambling. This stuff gets me angry a little. BTW Illinois, is the same as Cali with the smoking ban.

 

[froghaven5]

Did you see this?

Tinley Summit sparks idea for legal symposium
Jeff Barringer - Tuesday, Mar 20, 2012

After this weekend's summit, a number of people in the community -- those who could and those who couldn't attend the summit meeting in Chicago -- and I are exploring the idea of a Reptile and Amphibian Law Symposium that would be 3-4 days of panels, workshops and seminars on federal, state, and international laws and regulations and the people and organizations they impact.

While the summit itself is a good place to receive a "State of the Union" address, the limited time allowed and the distractions of an attached reptile expo limit the amount of real work and networking that might be accomplished.

As we hope to extend an invitation to virtually everyone with an interest in reptile laws, we have created an open group on Facebook, "neutral ground", that will allow anyone to submit their ideas and input. The group description says it best:

"I am looking for people who would like to discuss the proposal/idea of a reptile and amphibian laws and regulations symposium, to be 3-4 days of workshops and talks with all parties with a vested interest, including zoos, universities, all state FW & DNR, USFW, USDA and other interested parties. No reptile expo, no banquet, no auction, completely un-commercial and neutral - just work - if you are interested in participating in this discussion, or possibly assisting/volunteering/participating in this symposium please reply to this thread, or/and send me an email. "


Almost 100 people have already joined the group and are offering input, including Marshall Meyers of PIJAC who posted the following in support:

"PIJAC, in conjunction with several other national organizations representing zoos, marine parks/aquariums, sport fishing and hunting, food aquaculture, etc., plan on hosting a summit meeting to review problems encountered related to possession, trading, importing, exporting, captive breeding, etc. of non-native species...

Your idea of holding a symposium to pull together thoughts, problems, etc within the reptile/amphibian community that could be synthesized and submitted at the overall summit meeting would be most beneficial. In fact this could set the stage for other taxa...."


There is more to Marshall's post, where he reveals more about PIJAC's summit, as well as a new injurious Risk Screening methodology being tested by USFWS that will screen 1,400 species this year and may be one of a number of solutions to our issues with injurious and invasive species. But to read it and to participate in planning the reptile and amphibian law symposium, you will need to join our Facebook group at http://www.facebook.com/groups/344339472269726/

 

[wellington]

Andrea, I don't think I did see that. Unfortunately I don't do Facebook. I will try to look into it and see how it is going and if there is another way to get info other then the Facebook. Thanks. Hopefully anyone can join in on them, not just from Illinois.

 

[wildak]

Too bad the same group organizing it can't come to every state. I just don't understand some of the laws and reasoning behind them.

If we could come up with a plan as an organization or several organizations joining together for the same cause. We could help figure out ways to regulate and license serious keepers and breeders.
As was said earlier, a tier system. Different levels of licensing with different levels of commitment. We are going to have to bend a little but it would be far better than loosing everything we hold dear.

Right now we seem to have a lot of us in the dark as what is happening. We need a reptile TV news channel. Or maybe there's a website that has just the facts and not hear say and opinions. If there is please let me know.

I hope to open a reptile conservation center and breeding facility someday in the near future and don't want this to happen to me either. I would like to breed Chinese Alligators and possibly Komodo Dragons or other endangered reptiles without persecution.

 

[froghaven5]

http://www.nraac.org/laws/

 

[wildak]

Yeah thanks I just found that from the facebook page link, I missed that the first time.

---

http://www.usark.org/statelaws.php

This one shows upcoming changes and what's ahead, state by state or nation wide.

 

[StudentoftheReptile]

I have stated my opinions on this matter several times before on similar threads, so I'll try not to rehash my thoughts to much here. (feel free to search under my post history, and you could probably find the relevant threads).

I am not diametrically opposed to a reasonable regulation or permit system like what Mark (Madkins) suggested. Generally, I can agree that the average person is not able to properly keep a giant python, or a green iguana, or a sulcata tortoise, or a monitor lizard. If outlined and implemented correctly, I think such a permit system would help curb those types of animals (among others) from getting in the hands of people who, quite simply, have no business keeping them.

Here is the main issue, though: who decides all this? Who decides which species are categorized into which Tier? Who determines the proper "guidelines" for each species? In short, the answer cannot be the government alone. We cannot trust the government to do this on their own. I mean, just a few weeks ago, someone was telling us how their own Florida Fish & Game office couldn't identify a baby gopher tortoise when it was right in front of them. If some of these badge wearers can't even ID the native species in their own states, how can we rely on them to do anything else?

For everyone living under rock, the new Rule Listing that added Burmese pythons, African rocks, and yellow anacondas to the Lacey Act went into effect this past Friday. That means you can't transport any of those species across state lines anymore, nor can they be imported into the U.S. I am just waiting for the incident where someone is pulled over, and some ignorant FWS official tries to fine someone for carrying their small ball python across state lines to the nearest exotic vet because he "thought" it was a Burmese.

So again, the ONLY way a proper permit system can be created is if reptile industry leaders and the govt works TOGETHER. It is possible; Florida FWS has worked pretty closely with the reptile community for some of their ROCs (reptiles of concern) and with venomous species permitting, etc. But realistically, I do not see it happening on a federal level.

Here's why: As others have already mentioned, since the Rule Listing this year, many states have jumped on the "Ban all reptiles" bandwagon in some degree; including Illinois, Ohio, Rhode Island, Virginia, West Virginia, and more...all within a few weeks of that rule listing announcement on Jan 16th. Contrary to Mark's opinion, I have to say that when you give them a inch, they will take a mile. Anyone who keeps up with reptile-related legislation issues will see that this is true.

So while on a fundamental level, I agree with some form of regulation or permit system. But realistically, I do not feel it will ever be done properly, and ultimately, the less involvement the govt has in this hobby, the better it will be for us. It is OUR responsibility to start policing ourselves better.

---

If anyone is interested in getting a (relatively) brief history of the events that led the Rule Change on Jan 16th (including the pythons in Florida issue, and other herp laws in the past 4 years), I strongly encourage you to read this article I wrote on my blog: http://studentofthereptile.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/43/

 

[JacksonR]

These are the laws you disregard. Banning hamsters?? Dogs?? Turtles?? BS

Fascist country.