FWS Files Final Rule/ Constrictor Ban

US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) has filed a final rule with the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB). This filing has no material changes from the proposed rule that would add 9 constricting snakes to the Injurious Wildlife list of the Lacey Act. This would make import or interstate transport of the 9 constrictors a felony with heavy fines and potential jail time. This is the final stage of the rule making process. OMB's role is to review the proposed rule to ensure that the costs to businesses do not outweigh the purported benefits. In spite of USARK's information to the contrary, and the Small Business Administration's findings that FWS did not do its due diligence in determining economic impact, we remain unsure of OMB's position. As many as a million American citizens could be negatively impacted if this rule is enacted. It would create a whole new class of criminal out of law abiding citizens engaged in what is now a perfectly legal trade.

There is also likely to be an oversight hearing at the US House Natural Resources Committee because of the potential to destroy a viable $1.4 billion cottage industry; and the flagrant disregard by FWS for mandated process and procedure under the Administrative Procedures Act and Information Quality Act. USARK has uncovered evidence that appears to point to an intentional effort to manufacture science to support a policy directive based on staff preference at FWS. This preference by FWS could mean the loss of thousands of jobs and the destruction of viable sector of our nations economy in a time of hardship.

Members of the Reptile Nation should prepare themselves for the “Big Fight”. This process should take about 45 days to unfold. USARK calls upon the OMB, the US House of Representatives and the US Senate to look closely at how FWS has circumvented due process to create policy based on staff preference. USARK believes that these actions by a government agency, upon close examination, will be found to be arbitrary, capricious and unlawful.

USARK needs the Reptile Nation to pull together as never before. This is our chance to overcome unfair regulation. Please stay tuned to USARK alerts and forward this communique to you circle of influence.

Please click the Donate button at the top of the page and help protect your ability to trade reptiles.

Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.

I am open to correction and discussion :)

Hi,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Why have so many wound up in the Everglades?

---

A hurricane flattened the facilities of a lot of importers and let their stock free.

To the best of my, admitedly extremely limited, knowledge the only proven case of someone releasing a burmese in that region was a wally who wanted to ( and did ) get filmed capturing it again to make himself.. well I dunno what he thought that would make him really. :rolleyes:


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.

I am open to correction and discussion :)

---

It has been shown in breed bans and similiar dangerous dog legislature that bans are ineffective. The issue lies in the owner, not the animal. It has also been the case that one ban will lead to another. It is setting up a precedence to ban exotic animals. Any person with some common sense and a love of something other than goldfish, hamsters, cats, and dogs should be worried.

You own snakes but you don't care if other people's rights to own animals are impeded? That's hypocritical and narrow minded. It is this kind of irrational group think that is ruining our freedoms in this country. As long as it doesn't affect you then it doesn't matter?

Irresponsible people are going to go on doing irresponsible things. The real people punished are the responsible owners that follow laws and regulations. Why punish someone that is responsibly keeping these animals? Just because you don't like big snakes doesn't mean you should turn a blind eye to a fellow reptile enthusiast.

The point is that I'm emphasizing is that you should punish the people that are the problem. You should not punish the people responsibly owning these animals. That is counterproductive to the results desired. In this country I believe you are innocent until proven guilty but who knows, that might change next?

Regards,

B

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.

I am open to correction and discussion :)

---

1. You are on a ball python forum. So, "bedroom size" enclosures are going to be slim.

2. Just because you don't agree with owning a large snake, does not mean that we stop everyone from doing it. There are a lot of people who do it successfully, and love their big snakes just like pets.

3. Most pet stores suck. They are terrible at teaching future big snake owners about husbandry. But, breeders are great at it. And, most will welcome back any snake that outgrows it's owner. If you shut down interstate commerce, you are taking a lot of income away from great people. What are they supposed to do?

This gets passed, it opens a big doorway. There are strength in our numbers. I will not own many of these large constrictors, but that does not mean i will fight for the right of others to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.

I am open to correction and discussion :)

---

While yes, those snakes are quite large there are a ton of people across the nation who keep these snakes responsibly and are knowledgeable enough to care for these animals correctly. To say these animals should be banned just because a bunch of people are claiming they are going to take over the USA is really dumb.

The reason so many snakes are loose in the Everglades is due to the hurricane (as mentioned already). There are thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of responsible owners that can care for these animals. Should they lose their beloved pet just because a few idiots let their snakes loose (and this is not the reason we find so many down there anyway)?

And these snakes do not need a ROOM. Many keepers provide appropriate enclosures and keep the snakes secure. You need to do a little more learning before jumping to such conclusions. I'll never keep a large constrictor, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to if I wanted to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.

I am open to correction and discussion :)

---

The problem is that people that currently own them couldn't take them with if the had to move it would be a felony to take your pet to your new home, this also makes no provisions for seeking medical care for your pet. If you live on the state line and have to drive 5 minutes in to neighboring states you are a felon at that point.

An out right ban had never been or will it be an exceptionable solution. Also this ban never states that it's actions are going to directly impact the current situation that is cites as it prosed issue..Ex. How does keeping someone from taking there Burm from Colorado to Wyoming help get rid of the Invasive ones in the Glades..

It is just bad politics and badly written all the way around..

I would love to see all the undocumented cases of snakes being released by individual owners.

I am not doubting the hurricane's role in this. But no one can rule out released pets, either.

But let's just throw out Florida all together. Forget the wild pythons - they don't exist. Now, let's move on to PROPER care of a 15 foot snake. I would love to see more than a couple of individual's Burmese or Rock Python enclosures. Or Green Anaconda enclosures, complete with 12 foot pond.

I don't want to fight about anything, just throwing out the other side. Not trying to be a jerk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freakie_frog

The problem is that people that currently own them couldn't take them with if the had to move it would be a felony to take your pet to your new home, this also makes no provisions for seeking medical care for your pet. If you live on the state line and have to drive 5 minutes in to neighboring states you are a felon at that point.

An out right ban had never been or will it be an exceptionable solution. Also this ban never states that it's actions are going to directly impact the current situation that is cites as it prosed issue..Ex. How does keeping someone from taking there Burm from Colorado to Wyoming help get rid of the Invasive ones in the Glades..

It is just bad politics and badly written all the way around..

---

Is there not a grandfather clause?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Is there not a grandfather clause?

---

Nope..there is just the start of the issues with it..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

I would love to see all the undocumented cases of snakes being released by individual owners.

I am not doubting the hurricane's role in this. But no one can rule out released pets, either.

But let's just throw out Florida all together. Forget the wild pythons - they don't exist. Now, let's move on to PROPER care of a 15 foot snake. I would love to see more than a couple of individual's Burmese or Rock Python enclosures. Or Green Anaconda enclosures, complete with 12 foot pond.

I don't want to fight about anything, just throwing out the other side. Not trying to be a jerk.

---

Is your glass always half empty?

Show me any animal on this forum that does not have a suitable enclosure, and I won't call your bs. Sounds like you need to do WAY more research on this topic. I would go to USARK and look at all the documentation they have produced. Then re-think your stand on the subject.

Is this a country wide ban?

Simple Man, being hypocritical and narrow minded goes way beyond owning snakes. We are all guilty of this at many points in our lives. I don't appreciate the personal attack, but I am not offended.

I understand that carrying on a rational, well-thought out debate without stooping to lower levels like over-generalizations like calling me narrow minded and hypocritical is not the easiest thing to do, especially on a forum.

But let's rise above that, shall we?

That being said, I personally don't believe owning a snake that exceeds 15 feet and requires at least 2 people to SAFELY handle it is the best thing for our hobby. Corn Snakes don't escape and eat the neighbor's dog or cat. Ball Pythons don't make the news for nearly killing someone.

I LOVE our hobby. I LOVE snakes. I LOVE freedom. But freedom is NOT free. And allowing EVERYONE to do or own ANYTHING they want is irresponsible.

Could I be wrong? Sure. But so could anyone who disagrees with me.

My views on this are not set in stone. As I said in my first reply, I welcome disagreement and discussion. But let's keep it polite. As responsible, snake owning adults that is not too much to ask...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Austin236

Is this a country wide ban?

---

Yes it is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Austin236

Is this a country wide ban?

---

Yep nation wide..sucks don't it.. Better start emailing and sending letters to your congressmen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stratus_020202

Is your glass always half empty?

Show me any animal on this forum that does not have a suitable enclosure, and I won't call your bs. Sounds like you need to do WAY more research on this topic. I would go to USARK and look at all the documentation they have produced. Then re-think your stand on the subject.

---

You missed my point. I am talking about 15 to 20 foot snakes, not 3 to 4 foot Ball Pythons or Kingsnakes.

I don't mind you calling my posts B.S., but look at what you are replying to a bit better first, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

You missed my point. I am talking about 15 to 20 foot snakes, not 3 to 4 foot Ball Pythons or Kingsnakes.

I don't mind you calling my posts B.S., but look at what you are replying to a bit better first, please.

---

So you want to throw the giants under the bus cause you dont like them or understand why others like them and keep them.

By accepting the legislation on banning them will give them more room to work on the next bill. Which could ban owning any python, boa, colubrid,venomous.

Im not a huge fan of large snakes either, but who the hell am i to throw one under the bus cause i dont keep them. I totally understand why ones keep giants, their gorgeous just like venomous. I fight for everyone who keeps snakes, since last time i checked the Gov. runs this country not us. If they want to ban something they will. And if they feel they can get few persuaded over ot their side, whats next?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Simple Man, being hypocritical and narrow minded goes way beyond owning snakes. We are all guilty of this at many points in our lives. I don't appreciate the personal attack, but I am not offended.

I understand that carrying on a rational, well-thought out debate without stooping to lower levels like over-generalizations like calling me narrow minded and hypocritical is not the easiest thing to do, especially on a forum.

But let's rise above that, shall we?

That being said, I personally don't believe owning a snake that exceeds 15 feet and requires at least 2 people to SAFELY handle it is the best thing for our hobby. Corn Snakes don't escape and eat the neighbor's dog or cat. Ball Pythons don't make the news for nearly killing someone.

I LOVE our hobby. I LOVE snakes. I LOVE freedom. But freedom is NOT free. And allowing EVERYONE to do or own ANYTHING they want is irresponsible.

Could I be wrong? Sure. But so could anyone who disagrees with me.

My views on this are not set in stone. As I said in my first reply, I welcome disagreement and discussion. But let's keep it polite. As responsible, snake owning adults that is not too much to ask...

---

This ban would be like suddenly not allowing anyone in the U.S. to drive cars. Because lets face it cars kill more people a year do more widespread damage to both local and national environments than the big nine ever will. The irresponsible people and uncontrollable events in this, because of the media's shock sells mindset, have caused this hobby irreparable damage. Punish the offender not the populace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

That being said, I personally don't believe owning a snake that exceeds 15 feet and requires at least 2 people to SAFELY handle it is the best thing for our hobby. Corn Snakes don't escape and eat the neighbor's dog or cat. Ball Pythons don't make the news for nearly killing someone.

---

Why? Who are we to say, "That snake is too big for you, you can't handle something that complex." Not only that, but these breeders are well established. Research BHB, NERD, even Denial (who has awesome big beauties) on this forum. Look into their lives, and then tell them they can't handle it.

Should we look at other animals that are just as dangerous? Horses, cattle, dogs? I have a claustrophobic Labrador that will plow you over if you back him into a corner. Does that mean we should ban labs?

Where does too dangerous end?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

You missed my point. I am talking about 15 to 20 foot snakes, not 3 to 4 foot Ball Pythons or Kingsnakes.

I don't mind you calling my posts B.S., but look at what you are replying to a bit better first, please.

---

No, no. Not calling your posts bs. I love a good debate as well. Sorry, jumped the gun a bit there. I'm reading your post as 'nobody can care for these animals properly,' and yes I think that is bs. I just think you are trying to understand a "big snake" keeper, and going about it the wrong way.

Let's make this parallel...

I totally support my next door neighbor's right to own a few cats, even though I am allergic to them.

BUT... The very second they bring home a Lion or Tiger, I have a serious problem with that.

Does that make me a hypocrite or narrow minded?

I love German Shepherds, but I don't want wolves living next door, either, in case they DO get out and kill the local doggies and kitties.

I LOVE Colubrids, but if I found out someone in the upstairs apartment had Cobras and Mambas, I have a serious problem with that as well.

Hypocritical? Should everyone be allowed to own anything, just because I own a Corn or Milksnake? What about Rhinos? Should they be free to own them as well?

Not trying to offend anyone, just throwing more thoughts out there...

Here's another for example. Your state banned the owning, displaying or use of mistletoe in public venues or private dwellings. Why because if you're dumb enough to eat it it'll kill you. So some banns like this one are simply because someone somewhere was stupid and "We the People" feel the need to protect each other from themselves..

Hi,

I appreciate that you are trying to start a discusion.

But we had that discussion many, many times when this was first proposed. Your side lost. :P

I would do a search for the previous discusions and see what was said to prevent everyone just repeating themselves. This is an idiotic, vindictive, kneejerk reaction to a stable door that was opened by the wind years ago.

I am puzzled how you expect anyone to show you undocumented evidence of snakes being released however? :confused:

I get that lack of evidence is not evidence of lack but to ask for proof of the unproven section is almost zen.

There were genetic studies done on the snakes recovered from the everglades which supported the hurricane hypothesis and found no evidence of repeated infusions of fresh genes - something that would be expected if these were all released pets over many years.

As for not thinking people can, or should, keep some of these species this isn't the best website for finding examples - monstersnakes.com might be better for example.


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stratus_020202

No, no. Not calling your posts bs. I love a good debate as well. Sorry, jumped the gun a bit there. I'm reading your post as 'nobody can care for these animals properly,' and yes I think that is bs. I just think you are trying to understand a "big snake" keeper, and going about it the wrong way.

---

As I have stated, if someone can PROPERLY keep a 15 foot Anaconda or Rock Python, more power to them. However, a 16 year old kid still living with his mother, who has a 55 gallon aquarium and no plan for the poor animal when it reaches even 8 feet long - THAT upsets me.

Listen, guys and gals. I am more concerned about the care of the snakes than the freedom of the owners. It is too easy to buy these things without the ability to care for them 8 years down the road.

THAT is all I am saying.

Dr. Del, me asking you to prove a negative was intentional... It can't be done ;)

And saying that MY SIDE lost doesn't phase me at all. I don't have a side. Heck, I may come out of this saying let's ALL own African Rock Pythons.

I am just trying to discuss it. Is that wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...

---

Your typical amethystine python is hardly a HUGE snake, heck for its weight, it's hardly a LARGE snake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Let's make this parallel...

I totally support my next door neighbor's right to own a few cats, even though I am allergic to them.

BUT... The very second they bring home a Lion or Tiger, I have a serious problem with that.

Does that make me a hypocrite or narrow minded?

I love German Shepherds, but I don't want wolves living next door, either, in case they DO get out and kill the local doggies and kitties.

I LOVE Colubrids, but if I found out someone in the upstairs apartment had Cobras and Mambas, I have a serious problem with that as well.

Hypocritical? Should everyone be allowed to own anything, just because I own a Corn or Milksnake? What about Rhinos? Should they be free to own them as well?

Not trying to offend anyone, just throwing more thoughts out there...

---

I don't really think it's the governments right to say what we can and can not own. Personally I support requiring permits for larger snakes because it helps keep them out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. There are plenty of people in this country who own big cats, venomous snakes and wolves. These people are required to have permits, why because they can be dangerous animals, but people still have the right to own them. Yes accidents do happen and large dangerous animals do get out, but responsible owners are more likely to take precautions to prevent this than you would with your milk or corn snake. We need to stand united against bills like this because it will progress to the point where people are not allowed to own any exotic pets. If we don't try to stop this now it may be too late by the time they come for your snakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Let's make this parallel...

I totally support my next door neighbor's right to own a few cats, even though I am allergic to them.

BUT... The very second they bring home a Lion or Tiger, I have a serious problem with that.

Does that make me a hypocrite or narrow minded?

I love German Shepherds, but I don't want wolves living next door, either, in case they DO get out and kill the local doggies and kitties.

I LOVE Colubrids, but if I found out someone in the upstairs apartment had Cobras and Mambas, I have a serious problem with that as well.

Hypocritical? Should everyone be allowed to own anything, just because I own a Corn or Milksnake? What about Rhinos? Should they be free to own them as well?

Not trying to offend anyone, just throwing more thoughts out there...

---

Granted there are some animals like big cats that simply aren't pet's. And yes the big nine require special education and previsions. People fear big snakes but have no problem packing their kids up sitting them on 30 gallons of explosive liquid, them tieing them down and locking them in a 4500lb box of steel and glass and intentionality propelling said box at speeds of 60+ miles an hour with hundreds of other people in boxes of steel and glass filled with liquid explosive..Now who is being irresponsible..We even allow minors to take these risks but no can't own a big snake those things are dangerous..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

Your typical amethystine python is hardly a HUGE snake, heck for its weight, it's hardly a LARGE snake.

---

I didn't see that one on the list. Here is the list I saw:

1. Python molurus
2. Broghammeras reticulatus
3. Python sebae
4. Python natalensis
5. Boa constrictor
6. Eunectes notaeus
7. Eunectes deschauenseei
8. Eunectes murinus
9. Eunectes beniensis

Of course, my Latin could be off.

Quote:

---

However, a 16 year old kid still living with his mother, who has a 55 gallon aquarium and no plan for the poor animal when it reaches even 8 feet long - THAT upsets me.

---

And why should that affect me? If I want to keep a burmese and have the proper enclosure size, complete with locks on the cage to prevent escape and I take all the necessary precautions when handling said snake, why should the mistakes of the mother you mention (because obviously in the end, it is her fault for not telling her child no to an animal she knows nothing about) affect my ability to keep the snake I want?

You are comparing things that are not related. You can keep these large snakes in very small enclosures in comparison to keeping a wolf or tiger. Now if someone wants to set aside a few acres of land and build a secure enclosure for the tiger and has all the proper permits from the given state (if applicable) and has the necessary training, then I think that person should be allowed to keep what they want to keep.

Hi,

Not wrong - just redundant and a year or so late. :P

If you want to use the animal care argument then start working for a ban on cats and dogs - far more of them feature in reports of animal abuse after all.

They also kill far more wildlife and therefore have a greater negative impact on the environment than the snakes in the everglades. They even have a much greater negative impact in the everglades.

Which, for the record, is an artifically created environment that has been repeatedly modified and redefined by humans for more generations than I would like to count.

These same humans have now arbitrarily chosen a point in time and called it "natural" and seek to restore the environment to that state. Despite the fact there is no such thing as a stable or static state in nature. :rolleyes:

To be blunt there isn't a single part of the argument for this legislation that isn't absurd with even the most cursory glance.


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

I didn't see that one on the list. Here is the list I saw:

1. Python molurus
2. Broghammeras reticulatus
3. Python sebae
4. Python natalensis
5. Boa constrictor
6. Eunectes notaeus
7. Eunectes deschauenseei
8. Eunectes murinus
9. Eunectes beniensis

Of course, my Latin could be off.

---

Notice they say "Boa Constrictor".. there are more than 20 different subspecies and locality species of "Boa Constrictor" so that list jumps to almost 30 different types of snakes you can't keep..;)

I believe an age limit and license could be an answer... Along with PROOF of being able to house such a large snake.

Guys and gals, I am NOT siding with the government. Just trying to figure this all out.

We are regulated in nearly everything we do, whether we like it or not. We can't drive on the sidewalk. Why? Because there is a ban on that. We can't buy goods without paying taxes on them. We can't enter a movie theatre legally without purchasing a ticket.

America is NOT about doing whatever you please. Freedom is very limited. It is not anarchy. It is regulated and policed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay_Bunny

And why should that affect me? If I want to keep a burmese and have the proper enclosure size, complete with locks on the cage to prevent escape and I take all the necessary precautions when handling said snake, why should the mistakes of the mother you mention (because obviously in the end, it is her fault for not telling her child no to an animal she knows nothing about) affect my ability to keep the snake I want?

You are comparing things that are not related. You can keep these large snakes in very small enclosures in comparison to keeping a wolf or tiger. Now if someone wants to set aside a few acres of land and build a secure enclosure for the tiger and has all the proper permits from the given state (if applicable) and has the necessary training, then I think that person should be allowed to keep what they want to keep.

---

If you can provide a correct enclosure for a 17 foot snake to the proper authorities, and your parents sign a wavier for you to own one, I have absolutely no issue with that.

I am sorry that some of you are offended by this being brought up again, but you don't have to get involved if you said your peace a year ago.

I answer questions all the time on forums that have been asked a thousand times before by newbies. It is part of it.

Soon, all the questions that could ever be asked about husbandry and issues in general will have been answered at one time or another. But then along comes a new generation that needs to have them answered again...

Dr. Del, you stated a sad, sad fact.

More dogs and cats ARE abused, exponentially, than snakes. Yet, people are free to obtain them at will.

You, my friend, just demolished my argument about legislating animals based on proper housing... Unfortunately - and I mean that for the animals that suffer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Should everyone be allowed to own anything, just because I own a Corn or Milksnake? What about Rhinos? Should they be free to own them as well?

---

Should everyone be allowed to drive whatever vehicle they want, just because I drive a chevy impala?

Should they be able to drive ferraris or vehicles with terrible crash ratings?

Or what about SUVS and PICKUPS?? Those things cause more deaths to the OTHER VEHICLE'S passengers/drivers that they impact!

I'm ok with my neighbor driving an aveo or prius, but if they brought home a Ram 1500 hemi or an escalade, that's not ok. Fear is going to drive me to stomp on their personal freedoms and ban their vehicles.

lol.

In all seriousness, do you understand just HOW LOW the risks are of a neighbor owning large constrictors or venomous snakes is?

With the ONE MILLION plus giant constrictors in this country, and the currently unkown (by me) number of venomous snakes in this country kept by private keepers (but certainly thousands upon thousands), there has NEVER been a death attributed to any of those animals to anyone except a person working directly with them. There has NEVER been one instance of a neighbor or bystander being killed by a "rampaging" loose cobra or burmese python.

Never.

my bad about the earlier post for amethystine pythons, they were on a proposed list some time ago and I thought that this was the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

Should everyone be allowed to drive whatever vehicle they want, just because I drive a chevy impala?

Should they be able to drive ferraris or vehicles with terrible crash ratings?

Or what about SUVS and PICKUPS?? Those things cause more deaths to the OTHER VEHICLE'S passengers/drivers that they impact!

I'm ok with my neighbor driving an aveo or prius, but if they brought home a Ram 1500 hemi or an escalade, that's not ok. Fear is going to drive me to stomp on their personal freedoms and ban their vehicles.

lol.

In all seriousness, do you understand just HOW LOW the risks are of a neighbor owning large constrictors or venomous snakes is?

With the ONE MILLION plus giant constrictors in this country, and the currently unkown (by me) number of venomous snakes in this country kept by private keepers (but certainly thousands upon thousands), there has NEVER been a death attributed to any of those animals to anyone except a person working directly with them. There has NEVER been one instance of a neighbor or bystander being killed by a "rampaging" loose cobra or burmese python.

Never.

---

This is true. And it is also true that dogs cause far more injuries, and have even mauled people to death - much more traumatic, I would think, than being suffocated by a large snake.

I won't give in on people owning Tigers or Lions, but I am starting to see the relative safety of owning a large snake in relation to dogs that have caused far more injuries.

As I said, I wasn't set in my views either way. You all make very valid points. I WILL say this - I would rather my next door neighbor own an Anaconda than a Ridgeback with a history of biting people.

Please don't let me make enemies of anyone here. I don't own any Ball Pythons, but I was drawn here by the excellent racks in the DIY section.

I don't want to wear out my welcome. There is a lot we can all learn, and I would love to stay around gain from the experience of everyone here.

The truth is knox, there are a lot more responsible "big snake" keepers out there than irresponsible ones. We only hear about the bad stuff because, well lets face it, a successful herper with 1,000 sleeping big snakes just doesn't pull in attention like one really angry one.

Check out the newest episode of snakebytes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlNgc...el_video_title

I love Brian, and he is a great person to have in this hobby. Here are a lot of successfully kept big snakes. You can not tell me after watching this video you still believe these snakes can't be kept as pets? And, can you still say that because of the few people who do it wrong, we should all give up the hobby?

Stratus, believe it or not I have already been swayed :D

There have been some great points in this thread. To be honest, the ones that made the most sense were the appalling way some dogs and cats are kept (I see it all the time on Animal Cops Houston) yet they are not banned by the govt.

Based on the compelling arguments, I think it is hypocritical of the govt. to ban large snakes and not dogs and cats.

Unfortunately, the wrong being done is on the part of the irresponsible owners, not the animals or the people who take great pride and care in their animals.

Thanks! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Simple Man, being hypocritical and narrow minded goes way beyond owning snakes. We are all guilty of this at many points in our lives. I don't appreciate the personal attack, but I am not offended.

I understand that carrying on a rational, well-thought out debate without stooping to lower levels like over-generalizations like calling me narrow minded and hypocritical is not the easiest thing to do, especially on a forum.

But let's rise above that, shall we?

That being said, I personally don't believe owning a snake that exceeds 15 feet and requires at least 2 people to SAFELY handle it is the best thing for our hobby. Corn Snakes don't escape and eat the neighbor's dog or cat. Ball Pythons don't make the news for nearly killing someone.

I LOVE our hobby. I LOVE snakes. I LOVE freedom. But freedom is NOT free. And allowing EVERYONE to do or own ANYTHING they want is irresponsible.

Could I be wrong? Sure. But so could anyone who disagrees with me.

My views on this are not set in stone. As I said in my first reply, I welcome disagreement and discussion. But let's keep it polite. As responsible, snake owning adults that is not too much to ask...

---

I have read exactly as far as the above comment and I feel the need to chime in. Most Americans own a car, cars kill people and the neighbors dog all the time. This is not about safety. This is about the majority ganging up and taking away the rights of the minority. Thats now how we are suppose to do things here in the US. You need to demonstrate a real problem. They can't do that with science so they inflame emotions. Pet giant snakes are not a problem. The science has show it time and time again. There are issues with the sale and importation of the animals but they can all be handled without a ban. Require the animal to be registered and chipped before its sold. Problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Stratus, believe it or not I have already been swayed :D

There have been some great points in this thread. To be honest, the ones that made the most sense were the appalling way some dogs and cats are kept (I see it all the time on Animal Cops Houston) yet they are not banned by the govt.

Based on the compelling arguments, I think it is hypocritical of the govt. to ban large snakes and not dogs and cats.

Unfortunately, the wrong being done is on the part of the irresponsible owners, not the animals or the people who take great pride and care in their animals.

Thanks! :D

---

You still watched the episode didn't you :please: I can never get me enough snakebytes. Well, except for the strange things that happen at the end with Chewy. :weirdface

Quote:

---

I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.

---

The thing about this is that, in most cases, you do not need to have a bedroom sized enclosure with running waterfalls and a 12' pond in order to keep a big snake. Many of the older textbooks will tell you this, but nowadays, we have commercially made six foot, and even eight foot cages available on the market, that are designed for big snakes such as the Boaphiles, Visions, Sentec, and even ARS racks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

Stratus, believe it or not I have already been swayed :D

There have been some great points in this thread. To be honest, the ones that made the most sense were the appalling way some dogs and cats are kept (I see it all the time on Animal Cops Houston) yet they are not banned by the govt.

Based on the compelling arguments, I think it is hypocritical of the govt. to ban large snakes and not dogs and cats.

Unfortunately, the wrong being done is on the part of the irresponsible owners, not the animals or the people who take great pride and care in their animals.

Thanks! :D

---

Glad you were swayed. Most everyone on this forum is going to agree that there are steps that can be taken that would help various issues surrounding keeping the Giants. Banning them is not one of those steps. You can't just take away freedom without a reason. The problem is that the numbers don't show a need for a ban and they are pushing for one anyway. More dangerous animals are easily bought and sold every day (dogs, horses, cows). There are more dangerous wild animals in most states. Public welfare is not the issue. Its not the impact on native flora and fauna either. If it was then it should be a state issue for Florida and surrounding states. Non of the giants will thrive in New York were I live. Cats and dogs do more damage every day than the snakes ever could. Its certainly not about the animal well being. There is a stigma attached to owning snakes. The majority of the population will discourage you from getting a snake and would like nothing more than to kill it. You have to want a snake more than any other animal to deal with the stigma. In contrast people are constantly trying to give you puppies and kittens without any thought to whether or not you can care for one. At the end of the day this is a state issue if anything, not a federal issue. If my state wants me to get a permit to keep my snake I will gladly get one, providing its priced reasonably and not so high as to discourage. As far as my upstairs neighbor keeping venomous snakes. No I don't want that. Its not my right to tell him what he can and cannot keep. I don't want him to have a gun either or a drum set, or a loud stereo. I can move if I want. I should not go out and try to get any of those things banned.

There was nothing related to a personal attack in my post. I didn't question your character or slander you. My opinions were drawn from the words typed on your keyboard. My opinion is that that you were being narrow-minded and hypocritical when you first posted. You might have misunderstood the context in which I called you hypocritical but that might be my issue for not explaining it properly. You are appearing more open minded as the thread develops.

Neither of my assessments of you qualify as overgeneralization. An overgeneralization would be stating those facts about all people that are for banning large constrictors. You use overgeneralizing when you state that you support large snakes being banned (by implying no one can responsibly house or handle these animals). That is an irrational statement because there are many large snake enthusiasts that responsibly own animals. Those people contradict your generalization.

I think it is hypocritical to own snakes and support a ban on snakes. It is a disservice to all snake keepers by supporting a constrictor ban. There are people that would be for banning all species of snakes. In this context it is hypocritical to watch ownership rights dwindle purely on the basis that some snakes are "different". Large constrictors might just be the tip of the iceberg. It would be unfortunate to realize that we could have had something to do with saving our rights as snake keepers but failed only because we looked out for our own specific interests.

In conclusion we should simply hold the people responsible for their own animals. An animal that is kept responsibly isn't a threat. The responsibility inherantly lies within the keeper, not the animal. We must differentiate between responsible and irresponsible owners. People doing illegal or irresponsible things do those things regardless of the laws or regulations. I don't beleve that the majority of people keeping large snakes fall into that category. These people are the ones that will be affected the most under this ban.

Regards,

B

P.S. I am not aiming to offend anyone. I call things like I see them. People love me or hate me usually and I don't care either way. One thing I never do is throw around insults or attack someone's character. I also don't ever hold grudges or opinions. Nice to see your opinion has changed!

I honestly don't mind the need for a license to own animals that pose a life threat to a human being. A dog can inflict a good bite, but typically doesn't kill a person. A lion can eat someone and a full grown Green Anaconda or Retic can kill someone. What I detest, however, is the government dictating it via a ban.
If we had state and local herp organizations that were elected by the community overseeing proper care of big and hot snakes, and they were the ones issuing the permits, I'd be ok with that. A flat ban does nothing to promote responsible ownership. I could respect an industry expert with a ton of experience issuing me a license to own a cobra. I'd probably feel better about it knowing I have conformation that I'm doing the right stuff. It's like when we get certified to ship via Fedex. They inspect our packaging before giving us the green light to ship. They are the shipping experts and we respect them for considering the welfare of the animal and the shipping and ask us to do the same.
Just my 2 cents
Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesa2580

I honestly don't mind the need for a license to own animals that pose a life threat to a human being. A dog can inflict a good bite, but typically doesn't kill a person. A lion can eat someone and a full grown Green Anaconda or Retic can kill someone.

---

There are a lot more dog attacks/deaths in the states than snake attacks/deaths. Even if you account that there are a lot more dogs, you could multiply the number of snakes vs attacks, and dogs would still be greater.

We just don't hear about them very much because nobody wants to know how many boxers seriously injure people each year.

1. Yes, I did watch the video. I love all the Snakebytes videos - thanks for the link.

2. Thanks for the clarification, Simple Man. As I said, I may have stated things that were hypocritical, and don't mind being called out when I may be wrong. No harm, no foul. I still believe it takes a special type of owner to properly maintain a an Anaconda or Rock Python. But no more than it takes to own a Mastiff or Rottie. So in that, I agree I came across in a way I didn't intend.

3. So true about cars killing more people and pets than snakes. I don't believe anyone can oppose that with any stretch of rational argument.

Thanks for the replies and opposition. Seriously. I am now a bit more enlightened than when I first posted.





Should I call it a day before I get behind again? :confused: