New York Anti-Reptile Bill A07935

New York Anti-Reptile Bill A07935
Prohibits the ownership, possession or harboring of a wild animal or reptile;
makes violation a class E felony.
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=7935

Yet another vaguely worded piece of legislation! Huzzah!

Do they mean 'wild animal or wild reptile' or do they mean 'wild animals and all reptiles'??

Describing the chimp as a 'wild animal' makes little practical sense. Interpretation of this legislation will be a nightmare and guaranteed to be subjective and difficult for anyone to comply with.

*fuming*

I wish every lawmaker was required to take a technical writing course so they can learn to be specific. This is rediculous.

Sounds as if its going to be for Native wild animals/reptiles. If that is the case im all for not owning Native species. We already threaten them as it is let alone capturing them to keep them.

could you explain your reasoning more?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flameethrower

Sounds as if its going to be for Native wild animals/reptiles. If that is the case im all for not owning Native species. We already threaten them as it is let alone capturing them to keep them.

---

I dont see it being right to go and rip animals form nature to benefit us when there's soo many captive bred in the US alone to ful fill your every needs. Native species in the wild belong in the wild, not in our house.

What if the species is nearing extinction and it would take an intervention by us to capture some of them and captive breed them to ensure survival?

Then guess what, if you truly believed that, then you would own ZERO snakes. Think about it, every snake you, i, or anyone else owns has wild origins.

Collecting "usually" isn't the problem, yes of course it can be overdone, but the big problem is habitat destruction.

When they clear that land for that strip mall or housing division, guess what...no more habitat for the snakes = no more snakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flameethrower

I dont see it being right to go and rip animals form nature to benefit us when there's soo many captive bred in the US alone to ful fill your every needs. Native species in the wild belong in the wild, not in our house.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2kdime

I hate to throw this thread off topic....

But I'm ALL for captive breeding and keeping native species if it continues their survival.

Wasn't the Black footed ferret considered near/extinct?

But due to breeding programs they are keeping up in numbers

---

Im all for that too to help INCREASE the native wild species. Which is why there are groups funded by the state and zoos who breed them to increase the population

But im all for legislation to stop people going out catching a snake/frog/animal and keeping it. Those snakes/frogs/animals should remain wild and be admired from their natural home. SHould only be premitted for research of increasing their survival population

What an idiotic and poorly worded law. WAY too vague and open to interpretation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flameethrower

Sounds as if its going to be for Native wild animals/reptiles. If that is the case im all for not owning Native species. We already threaten them as it is let alone capturing them to keep them.

---

Really? So you believe corn snakes should be illegal in in all of the southeastern states? *Owning* an animal is very different than *capturing* one.

Even if your statement was changed to state that you are all for not capturing native species, I still couldn't agree. Some native species are very plentiful and the wild populations are in no danger. Even those that are in some danger are probably not significantly harmed by the few that might be collected from the wild. It is habitat destruction that is endangering most of them. In some cases, capturing the few that remain and then starting a captive breeding program may be the only hope the species has for survival.

yes, at one time the black footed ferrett was like number 2 on the endangered list.

I remember the A.F.H. T shirt that said, "If Herpetoculturist were around, dinosaurs wouldn't be extinct."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2kdime

I hate to throw this thread off topic....

But I'm ALL for captive breeding and keeping native species if it continues their survival.

Wasn't the Black footed ferret considered near/extinct?

But due to breeding programs they are keeping up in numbers, the first animals of such programs would have had to come from SOMEWHERE.

---

When they say wild animal/reptile I'm assuming they mean captive bred as well. Felony charges for having reptiles, what's happening to this country?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redpython

Then guess what, if you truly believed that, then you would own ZERO snakes. Think about it, every snake you, i, or anyone else owns has wild origins.

Collecting "usually" isn't the problem, yes of course it can be overdone, but the big problem is habitat destruction.

When they clear that land for that strip mall or housing division, guess what...no more habitat for the snakes = no more snakes.

---

Me owning Pythons has nothing to do with the US problem. But like you just stated they have wild in them from ancestors years ago. Im talking about taking a animal directly from the wild that was born and raised wild. They should remain there.

We cant go based off what other countries do, this is our native animals to protect and leave be.

so you think it's ok, in your opinion to collect wild animals from somewhere other than the united states? but it's not ok to do it in the united states?

This seems like hypocritical thinking, because you owning pythons may have something to do w/ the african "problem."

As long as populations are healthy, collect away. To some people having true locality animals is worth more than the craziest genetic mutations out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flameethrower

Me owning Pythons has nothing to do with the US problem. But like you just stated they have wild in them from ancestors years ago. Im talking about taking a animal directly from the wild that was born and raised wild. They should remain there.

We cant go based off what other countries do, this is our native animals to protect and leave be.

---

I'm not familiar enough with the details of the black-footed ferrets to speak on that one. But I do know there are numerous species of animals that are completely extinct in the wild, and still exist only due to captive breeding. In lots of cases, it is captive breeding done in accredited zoos, but in others it is due to private keepers. There are at least a few examples where captive breeding programs have allowed animals to be successfully reestablished in the wild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redpython

"If Herpetoculturist were around, dinosaurs wouldn't be extinct."

---

Ooh, I LIKE that!

The same goes for fish. Most Victorian cichlid species are extinct in the wild due to habitat desctruction. They live on in the tanks of hobbyists all over the world!

I have to assume that since they cited the chimp attack in CT that they are NOT talking about native animals captured from the wild. It's hard to tell exactly what they ARE talking about from the language used.

Existing law:

§ 370. Protection of the public from attack by wild animals and reptiles

Any person owning, possessing or harboring a wild animal or reptile capable of inflicting bodily harm upon a human being, who shall fail to exercise due care in safeguarding the public from attack by such wild animal or reptile, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by both. "Wild animal" within the meaning of this section, shall not include a dog or cat or other domestic animal.
Previous attacks upon a human being by such wild animal or reptile, or knowledge of the vicious propensities of such wild animal or reptile, on the part of the possessor or harborer thereof, shall not be required to be proven by the people upon a prosecution hereunder; and neither the fact that such wild animal or reptile has not previously attacked a human being, nor lack of knowledge of the vicious propensities of such wild animal or reptile on the part of the owner, possessor or harborer thereof shall constitute a defense to a prosecution hereunder.

CREDIT(S)

(Added L.1965 c. 1047, § 3.)


Further definitions - to wit, adding reptiles as defined below to the existing law noted above:

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/envir...3_11-0103.html

or if you're too lazy to look it up:


(5) All reptiles that are venomous by nature, pursuant to department regulation, and the following species and orders: Burmese Python (Python m. bivittatus), Reticulated Python (Python reticulatus), African Rock Python (Python sabae), Green Anaconda (Eunectes maurinus), Yellow Anaconda (Eunectes notaeus), Australian Amethystine Python (Morelia amethistina and Morelia kinghorni), Indian Python (Python molurus), Asiatic (water) Monitor (Varanus salvator), Nile Monitor (Varanus nilocitus), White Throat Monitor (Varanus albigularis), Black Throat Monitor (Varanus albigularis ionides) and Crocodile Monitor (Varanus salvadori), Komodo Dragon (Varanus komodensis) and any hybrid thereof,

(6) Crocodylia.


Get it?