Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 577

0 members and 577 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,916
Threads: 249,118
Posts: 2,572,199
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, Wilson1885

Very Vague City Ordinance

Printable View

  • 05-06-2013, 10:55 AM
    Willie76
    Very Vague City Ordinance
    So many of you know, I am moving back to MN for a career change. Since my collection has grown, I decided to check the city's local pet ordinances and much to my dismay, it is VERY, VERY vague and open to much interpretation. "Wild Animals Prohibited...or any animal wild in nature (ferae naturae)." State law says they're fine. As a matter of fact, there are many quality breeders in MN. Unlike many State and other city's local ordinances that list exemptions, this broad statement is used. If I look in the Legal Dictionary, "ferae naturae" is defined as, "Animals that, as a matter of common knowledge, are naturally ferocious, unpredictable, dangerous, or mischievous." In contrast, domitae animals are defined as tame or domesticated.

    So, with so much left to being interpreted, do captive bred, captive raised, tame snakes apply? If they do, wouldn't the ordinance then also apply to guinea pigs, hamsters, tropical fish, hermit crabs, and the like? Or would you interpret this as "truly wild animals that were removed from their natural wild habitat to be forced into being a pet. Animals such as raccoons, lions, tigers, bears, etc?" At this point, I am in the belief that my snakes, since being captive bred for the pet trade, captive hatched, captive raised, and tame that I will be in compliance of the ordinance.

    Here is the ordinance as written:

    Sec. 4-3. - General restrictions on livestock; wild animals prohibited.
    (a) No person shall keep any horse, cattle, sheep, goat, or animal of a wild nature (ferae naturae) in the city. No person shall
    permit such an animal to be kept on premises owned, occupied, or controlled by him/her except under the conditions
    prescribed by this chapter.
    (b) No horse, cattle, sheep or goat shall be kept in the city except within the agricultural zone.

    I am not looking for legal advice (unless you're a practicing lawyer), but wanted to open this up for discussion and if you have faced similar vague ordinances...
  • 05-06-2013, 10:57 AM
    ChaosAffect
    If they're sold in local pet stores then you're fine. I'd pop in to a PetSmart or PetCo in the area and see if they sell Balls. If they do then they obviously don't violate the city ordinance.
  • 05-06-2013, 11:06 AM
    Willie76
    Re: Very Vague City Ordinance
    A city of 12,000. They do have a Super Wal-Mart, Shopko, and a couple other larger retail chains...no PetSmart or Petco to compare.
  • 05-06-2013, 11:27 AM
    Annarose15
    What city?
  • 05-06-2013, 11:58 AM
    Willie76
    Re: Very Vague City Ordinance
    The city is Fairmont, MN.

    Here is the link for their ordinances: http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=10755
  • 05-06-2013, 12:06 PM
    ChaosAffect
    I just went and checked my local ordinances. Nothing about any kind of animals besides dogs, cats, and livestock. Interestingly, it's illegal to own a Pit Bull here unless you register it with the police. I bet that one's rarely enforced.
  • 05-06-2013, 12:10 PM
    JLC
    If you think that ordinance is going to give you trouble, you might consider choosing a home that is just outside of the city boundaries. That's one of the benefits of looking up this stuff BEFORE you move. At least the state laws are reasonable, and you can always live "in Fairmont" without actually living within the city limits.
  • 05-06-2013, 12:45 PM
    Kodieh
    Re: Very Vague City Ordinance
    Don't be afraid to contact the local animal welfare division with your questions, they will now the information you want.


    Where I'm at, there's only a kennel law and nuisance cat law. No language pertaining to reptiles. And no language means go for it.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG Galaxy SIII using Tapatalk 2
  • 05-06-2013, 12:48 PM
    mackynz
    Re: Very Vague City Ordinance
    Sec. 4-3. - General restrictions on livestock; wild animals prohibited.
    (a) No person shall keep any horse, cattle, sheep, goat, or animal of a wild nature (ferae naturae) in the city. No person shall
    permit such an animal to be kept on premises owned, occupied, or controlled by him/her except under the conditions
    prescribed by this chapter.



    What are the conditions, do you meet them? If so I would think it really isn't a problem.
  • 05-06-2013, 01:40 PM
    Willie76
    Re: Very Vague City Ordinance
    Just spoke to the City Attorney for clarification and he agrees it is a little vague but we are completely safe. As I had interpreted it, "wild animals" refers to really wild animals such as lions, tigers, and bears (on my!).

    Fish, reptiles (including snakes), guinea pigs, etc are unregulated and as he put it, "Could care less". So, as a good steward for my animals, I did my job and feel relieved. Always better to be safe than sorry when moving..
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1